New Mono 1.2 Now Supports WinForms

smbarbour writes "The Mono project (the open-source .NET compatibility library acquired by Novell when Ximian was purchased) has released version 1.2. They are now including support for WinForms. Ars Technica has a detailed rundown on the new release. The Mono project supports Visual Basic.NET as well, so developers that use VB.NET now have the possibility of directly porting applications to Linux." From the article: "Relatively high memory consumption and performance bottlenecks are commonly perceived as being amongst Mono's most significant weaknesses. Some critics frequently refer to various performance issues to support arguments against broader adoption of Mono technology in open source projects, most notably within the GNOME community. The performance improvements in Mono 1.2 could potentially address such criticisms, but it is likely that a lot more work will be required before the problems are completely resolved."

Comments

So what?

[sproketboy]

Who uses this?

Re:So what?

[LWATCDR]

If you use Beagle for searching you do.
There are some cool mono projects out there. Now if they would just create a native compiler for mono programs so I don't have to have the entire run-time installed that would be great.

Re:So what?

[DittoBox]

http://banshee-project.org/Main_Page

Banshee is one of those really cool projects too.

Re:So what?

[ramunasg]

And how is .NET better?

Re:So what?

[LiquidCoooled]

I keep trying it.
I have attempted to kick start it a number of times and really hope this project reaches its full potential.

My current language is classic VB but would gladly approach another language if the IDE were right.
I don't like the new VS IDE, it feels like all new Microsoft applications - slow and fumbly and they all act like a webpage (clicking between folders in outlook is awful you see emails displayed from the previous panel and everything - express was instant.

Re:So what?

[doktorjayd]

crappy languages like java?

as opposed to real-world languages like VB?

Re:So what?

[oohshiny]

Chances are, you do. It ships with several Linux distros, and some Gnome apps are written in it.

Re:So what?

[XMyth]

Properties (well that's how C# is better).

Re:So what?

[Nataku564]

Java will have those incorporated in short order, i'm sure. Even if not, its not a bit loss at all. Getter/Setter methods are easy to generate and offer the exact same functionality.

Re:So what?

[EvanED]

Java will have those incorporated in short order, i'm sure.

The point is that, IMO, Java trails .Net in terms of design. I know of nothing that I would consider an advantage in language design to Java over C#, and many advantages to C#. Some are at the level of syntactic sugar (like properties or operator overloading), some are much deeper (like delegates).

Getter/Setter methods are easy to generate and offer the exact same functionality.

At the cost of (arguably) reduced readability in many cases.

Re:So what?

[sproketboy]

Just use Netbeans which can use VB 6 and build java apps.

Links:

http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?threa d_id=40344

http://blogs.sun.com/herbertc/entry/project_sempli ce_visual_basic_for

http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/herbertc?entry=pr oject_semplice_visual_basic_for

http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/05/19/write-ja va-web-apps-in-visual-basic-or-javascript/

http://vbwire.com/brief.asp?9342

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=107

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Properties? That's what you think is better? Are you gay? C-Shit has been around for 6 years and guess which language has the largest growth in all that time.. PHP. Yup. A non M$ language - 90% used on Linux. Of course Java is still #1 and still growing while M$ is still drain circling.

Re:So what?

[ZeroExistenZ]

Properties? Isn't the term "object orientated"? :)

Re:So what?

[thzinc]

I *hate* properties in C#. I was so pissed off when I found that using C#'s strange little "properties" syntax over actual FUNCTIONS yielded a 30% improvement in performance. They couldn't get industry-standard, been-used-heavily-since-C functions working well enough, so they fudged getters and setters with a dumb syntax.

Re:So what?

[JamesNK]

Properties
User defined value types (structs)
Delegates
Events
Explicit interface implementation
Anonymous delegates (allowing closure)
IDisposable interface and the using keyword
No checked exceptions
Out and ref parameters
Generator methods (yield)

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Properties are hardly the bit where C# has advantage over Java. Here is a list off my head:

- Generics that you would actually write (rather than just use the ones supplied)
- Option of having virtual vs. static methods (although I'd rather have virtual by default)
- Windows Forms, P/Invoke, COM Interop - the bits that make hooking up with Windows native service easy

Java has its advantages over C#, too, of course. But properties? A decent IDE makes that more/less non-issue.

Re:So what?

[CableModemSniper]

Let me guess all your getters and setters did was set and get an instance var. What are the odds that the compiler, knowing you were using a getter/setter, and knowing that it didn't actually do anything, optimized away the function call overhead (that it couldn't optimize with your informal getters and setters)? Nope that can't be it, it must be that C# functions are extra-slow.

Re:So what?

[BigBuckHunter]

Who uses this?

Every programmer that has ever written in VB.net. The bigger question is:

so developers that use VB.NET now have the possibility of directly porting applications to Linux

Porting? Porting what? They develop in VB.Net, and it should run on any .NET runtime regardless of whether it is mono, MS, or whatever. Wasn't that the whole point?

BBH

Re:So what?

[filesiteguy]

Valid comment. (I cannot believe they marked you as flame bait for this.)

There aren't that many Mono users out there yet because of a few reasons. First off, the GIMP toolkit looks like crap. (That's a fact, not an opinion.) The only Mono GUI app I've seen is F-Spot, which I won't use due to its poor UI.

Now that Winforms are supported, maybe peeps on the Wintendo side of things can get a decent looking GUI app built in Mono. I suppose we *nix folks would be stuck with GTK+ apps, but then at least some people would get looks.

I would love to get myself off of the wierdo-language constructs of Java and into C#/Mono, but couldn't until now, without relinquishing some serious L&F qualities.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hyuk, C# properties are just methods with special names. You can call them directly if you want, instead of using the property syntax.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

"it should run on any .NET runtime regardless of whether it is mono, MS.."

You would think. But the reality is somewhat different.

Re:So what?

[nmb3000]

I know of nothing that I would consider an advantage in language design to Java over C#, and many advantages to C#.

Two things I can think of offhand that Java has an upper hand with are more powerful enums (here's an example) and a much stronger Collections library (C# is notably lacking a Set collection).

However, as of late I certainly agree with you. I keep seeing "new" features in Java that it lacked until C# (especially 2.0) came out (though it's still missing some nice things like partial classes, passing-by-reference, and variable-length argument lists). Another example of why it's good to have options/competition. Personally, I find C# much more intuitive and easy to develop with than Java.

Re:So what?

[aled]

Java (much like Flash) is being horribly misused. It is not meant for every other fancy visual GUI application and, hopefully, it never will be.

FUD. There are some good graphical java apps. Look at Swing Sighting for examples.
Azureus is a well known app on SWT.

It lacks support of DLLs (or other such libraries)

More FUD. You can use JNI api to make native calls, thought it is not automatic like calling a DLL from Visual Basic. You have to code the calls in C/C++.

the chances of seeing a Java application whose GUI actually blends in the slightest with the OS upon which it runs are slim to none

FUDfest. Java 6 will have some desktop support. Apple had a Java implementations that blends with its desktop very well for years (I haven't seen this myself).

and of course: it is slow

That is like open the gates of flames. Slow in which context, on which hardware, what app, what the load, to what are you comparing?

I could go on about how JRE annoys the heck out of me; For example, I couldn't properly uninstall an old version of Eclipse because it wanted an extremely old version of JRE (?!!).

What do you mean? Eclipse is distributed as a zip on Windows. Doesn't even has an installer. You just unzip to install, and delete the dir to uninstall.

For text-based cataloguing stuff, simple little GUIs and extremely cross-platform software, Java is truly a wonderful thing. I'm not saying it's bad; I'm just saying it's misused.

You seem to not know that the most use of Java is actually in server side apps, like web apps, web services, enterprise server... and mobile phones of course.

Re:So what?

[MassacrE]

In practice, the object typedness of java enumerators does not make up for the them being harder to map into native code (C enumerators and C# enumerators are almost identical) and being unable to be used as flags.

Also in practice, a Set provides nothing that a Map with only keys and null values provides other than reduced memory utilization. Since the CLR already reduces memory utilization vs. Java, this isn't really a Java win.

Re:So what?

[Nataku564]

At the cost of (arguably) reduced readability in many cases.

So, let me see if I got this straight...

obj.setProperty(sampleValue);

is harder to read than

obj.Property = sampleValue;

Yeah ... I am afraid we don't quite see eye to eye on this one. The issue of delegates I agree with to some degree, as it is nice syntactic sugar, but one that is, again, easily done equivalently well through the use of listener interfaces. Admittedly, it uses more lines of code, but it also guarantees that people actually impliment the interface, as opposed to simply subscribing to events haphazardly and hoping they got the right ones.

And, while I am at it - C#'s lack of a "throws" clause on functions is just as annoying. In Java, I have a programmatic way of knowing what exceptions to expect from a function (other than runtime ones, of course). In C#, I have to guess ... or just catch Exception and hope it isn't a nasty one that I am keeping from rightfully propogating up the stack. Now, if you are purely in your own code this isn't absolutely terrible, as you can just start digging and figure it out. However, if you are using any microsoft stuff, or any third party dlls, you are pretty much screwed.

Re:So what?

[Nataku564]

FUDfest. Java 6 will have some desktop support.

Lets not forget SWT either. That, quite literally, blends into whatever desktop you are running. Heck, Eclipse's SWT implementation looks better than most native apps.

Re:So what?

[HazE_nMe]

The guys over at BF2CC are using Mono to give Linux BF2 server admins the ability to use the BF2CCD with their server. I currently use BF2CCD with my Linux BF2 server and it works great.

For those wondering, BF2CC is a robust command console for administering a BF2 (Battlefield 2) gameserver. It gives you a bunch of auto-admin functions such as auto-kick when score goes too far negative.

Rather than make a linux version of their program, Mono has enabled the devs to keep developing on .NET, thus allowing Linux admins to use the software.

Haze

Re:So what?

[IMightB]

F-Spot http://f-spot.org/Main_Page, and tomboy http://www.beatniksoftware.com/tomboy/

Re:So what?

[EvanED]

... Yeah ... I am afraid we don't quite see eye to eye on this one.

I do think the former is easier to read. It's not a big difference, but it's still easier.

I also think that a + b is easier to read than a.add(b). If there were a language that didn't support = operators at all, even for primitives, what would you think of it? Just as easy to read as if you went through and changed a.set(b) to a=b everywhere?

The other advantage I see properties having is the following: they let you use standard fields and later change them to be properties without changing any other code. Direct language support. If you want to be able to change representations, do extra processing, everything that using accessor methods gets you in Java, you either need to write it with setters and getters right from the start (and have corresponding code blowup... you're essentially writing the same thing three times; if Java had macros I would regularily use something like #define SG_FIELD(type, name) type name; void set##name(type new##name) { name = new##name; } type get##name() { return name; } to avoid the nonsense of writing the same thing over and over and freaking over again) or you need to use a tool that will automatically refactor the uses of a field to use setters and getters. Incidentally, Eclipse provides such a tool. Eclipse is a wonderful IDE, and was the reason that the work I did with Java a while ago was one of the more plesant programming experiences I've had despite (as you might be able to tell) being a fairly-big anti-fan of Java.

The issue of delegates I agree with to some degree, as it is nice syntactic sugar, but one that is, again, easily done equivalently well through the use of listener interfaces

Not always "easily". If you use interfaces, you have to use the function name provided, you can't give an arbitrary "call this function" construct. You can get around this with inner (and perhaps anonymous) classes, but at the expense of quite a bit more code.

It's Java's lack of delegates that is the reason that they need the nonsense like "you can subclass Thread or implement Runnable", "subclass WindowAdapter or implement WindowListener (oh, which BTW you'll have to implement all 10 methods even if you're only interested in one)", etc.

And, while I am at it - C#'s lack of a "throws" clause on functions is just as annoying.

I'll grant this one to you. Personally, I don't know where I stand with regards to checked exceptions. I'll agree that it can be nice in certain cases, but at the same time, it can be a big pain in the butt in others. One of my friends is doing a class project where they're looking at extending the Java language with something (I don't know exactly what they're doing, but it's something that relates to ensuring that cleanup code is run), and was telling me about a project that someone else worked on where they did a compromise. Basically, they make functions that could be called cross-module (read: package) checked, so you had to declare all possible exceptions that could leave that code. However, private and protected methods do not have to declare the exceptions that could be thrown, so a change to what one function does doesn't necessarily propagate to a zillion others. This to me sounds like a very reasonable compromise.

Of course, then you have C++, where the exception specifications are perhaps the worst-designed feature of the "++" part. ;-)

Now, if you are purely in your own code this isn't absolutely terrible, as you can just start digging and figure it out. However, if you are using any microsoft stuff, or any third party dlls, you are pretty much screwed

Okay, third party tools I'll again give you some (maybe most) of the time, but MS stuff? It's documented in the API reference plain as day. It's far easier to find that out than it would be to go through your code! You could make the argument that you don't know for sure that's all you have to deal with, but considering that the MSDN documentation is second to none in terms of quality, I don't think you have much to worry about there.

(Though I'll point out that the Java extension I mentioned above would apparently go a long way to solving your qualms)

Re:So what?

[a.d.trick]

the chances of seeing a Java application whose GUI actually blends in the slightest with the OS upon which it runs are slim to none

FUDfest. Java 6 will have some desktop support. Apple had a Java implementations that blends with its desktop very well for years (I haven't seen this myself).

The GP was definitely exajerating, but I don't know about FUDfest. From my experience as a Linux user Java apps tend to have a fair number of usability problems. I'll pick on Eclipse 'cause I use it the most. First, the 'Preferences' should be under the 'Edit' menu, for some reason it migrated over to 'Window'? So, I wanted to figure out how to add a plugin. The 'Preferences' dialog is quite a pain as it is with a million things all over the place, after about 30 minutes of ploding around in there and just about making my brain implode I finally found it under 'Help'! Help is for Help files not software configuration. Maybe you Windows users have grown used to this kind of thing.

Re:So what?

[ClosedSource]

"The issue of delegates I agree with to some degree, as it is nice syntactic sugar, but one that is, again, easily done equivalently well through the use of listener interfaces. Admittedly, it uses more lines of code, but it also guarantees that people actually impliment the interface, as opposed to simply subscribing to events haphazardly and hoping they got the right ones."

It's pretty clear that using interfaces for events is a major kludge. If you have to handle the same event from different objects than you have to have an adapter.

Your comment about "hoping they got the right ones" doesn't make any sense to me. If you don't know what events you want to hook up to you're going to have a problem that neither Java nor C# can prevent.

Re:So what?

[AnarkiNet]

It has to do with many things. Readability is one, refactoring is another. Its much easier to refactor a symbol that is used for both get/set than having to refactor two seperate methods (that are only different from other non-getter/setter methods due to their name). Really though, its the readability of the getter/setter declaration.. C# example: private string _MyName; public string MyName { get { return this._MyName; } set { if (value != string.Empty) { this._MyName = value; } } } Java form: private string _MyName; public string getMyName() { return this._MyName; } public void setMyName(string value) { if (value != "") { this._MyName = value; } }

Re:So what?

[AnarkiNet]

Ok, /. chowed on my code, oh well. Someone who isnt new here will have to post some readable code to illustrate what my point is here.

Re:So what?

[castlec]

You can simulate pass by reference in java by changing the input of the method to an array of length 1. Obviously, it's a memory waste, but it has saved me a lot of effort in the past while porting C code.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Banshee is one of those really cool projects too.

Banshee is a Rhythmbox clone which uses twice as much memory and has bugs all over the place. The only reason Banshee exists is to _push_ more mono into gnome.

Re:So what?

[mabinogi]

> The only Mono GUI app I've seen is F-Spot, which I won't use due to its poor UI.

Then what do you use? I have coincidentally just started using F-Spot because as far as I can tell, it's the best, most well thought out application of its class available for Linux.

DigiKam looks like it has more features, but its UI is pretty impenetrable compared to F-Spot

If there's something that's even better then I'm genuinely interested in finding it before I waste too much time tagging my photos in F-Spot.

And on the topic of Mono - I had no idea that F-Spot was a Mono application (as I haven't had to install it from source, due to it being standard in Ubuntu), it just looked like any other Gnome application to me...

Re:So what?

[EsbenMoseHansen]

SWT is a pain to use, and doesn't support printing on any relevant platform. Swing is just ugly, slow and a pain to use, I'd recommend it over SWT any day.

QT release a Java interface not so long ago. So maybe there is hope that Java will finally get a decent toolkit.

Re:So what?

[WWWWolf]

Properties (well that's how C# is better).

Ruby has similar syntax, which is even more concise (attr :foo, and you have default getter and setter for @foo done - overriding that stuff is simple).

And undoubtedly, Java will follow soon =)

Re:So what?

[eu_virtual]

"First off, the GIMP toolkit looks like crap. (That's a fact, not an opinion.)" No... That's an opinion, not a fact. don't confuse the two. If it's something you think, it's an opinion, if it's something everyone thinks then you can call it a fact.

Re:So what?

[xtracto]

the chances of seeing a Java application whose GUI actually blends in the slightest with the OS upon which it runs are slim to none

FUDfest. Java 6 will have some desktop support.

Sure, and C# 2021 will be the most secure and intelligent programming language...
I agree with GP about this point, not that I really care but it is something that has bothered me about Java from the first time I used it, every GUI toolkit they offer has as a property Ugliness (in fact wth JSwing the JFrame class has a property called setUgliness(unisgned int)).

You seem to not know that the most use of Java is actually in server side apps, like web apps, web services, enterprise server... and mobile phones of course.
You forgot one which is the reason I use Java 99% of the time these days. Research. I think Java is one of the best programming languages for research because of the quantity of libraries (both free and non free) available. For example, I myself use RepastJ (multi agent system simulator), and recently started to use JSci (math and science library) among with lots of other libraries.

The CompSci community uses java a lot. That is something Microsoft will have *hard* time getting into if they wanted. The main reason is that there are lots of scientific tools that are *just there* and would need to be reimplemented in whatever other language.

And as you said, if you really need something else, there is also JNI (I used JNI to interface between a MAS in JADE [java agent development environment] and a neural network in C++) so with Java we scientists have everything we need.

Re:So what?

[Gnulix]

But, surely everyone knows that GTK looks like crap?

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Weren't variable-length parameters added via syntactic sugar in Java 5?

Re:So what?

[baadger]

GTK looks like whatever theme engine you apply to it. If it looks like crap it's because you have bad taste. If you mean it looks like crap from an API/programmer standpoint (C) then why not look into some bindings.

Re:So what?

[aled]

That is an Eclipse UI design problem, not a Java problem. OTOH portable application probably can't automagically use every platform UI guidelines. Some compromise has to be made. In this particular case I agree in that Eclipse has some weird UI conventions.

Re:So what?

[aled]

You forgot one which is the reason I use Java 99% of the time these days. Research. I think Java is one of the best programming languages for research because of the quantity of libraries (both free and non free) available.

What you point is what I think is one of the better features of the Java platform: reuse. There are libraries for almost everything and one can reuse without recompiling or rewriting.
There are problems with crossed dependencies (lib a requeries lib b version 1.1 and lib c requeries lib b 1.2) but future Java versions may have some way to help.

Re:So what?

[mythz]

Properties and indexes go a long way in creating nice intuitive DOM for your libraries, e.g: document.elements[0].firstChild.attributes["foo"]. nodeValue = "Hello C#"; document.getElements().get(0).getFirstChild().getA ttributes().get("foo").setNodeValue("Hello Java!"); What is easier to read is left up as an exercise for the reader.

Re:So what?

[ultranova]

Also in practice, a Set provides nothing that a Map with only keys and null values provides other than reduced memory utilization. Since the CLR already reduces memory utilization vs. Java, this isn't really a Java win.

Actually, the default Set implementation in Java (HashSet) is a wrapper around a HashTable (which implements Map). Or at least the version shown Eclipse's "view definition" function was. Dunno if that's so in different JVMs...

Re:So what?

[XMyth]

Having dealt with hardware vendors whose API is ported directly from Java to C# (I'm looking at you Topaz), properties are the first thing that come to my mind. Imagine a C# library with no properties and a LOT of getXYZ() setXYZ() methods. It's a real eyesore.

But yea, generics are great...Not sure if java has anonymous methods or not either.

Re:So what?

[XMyth]

You know C# has had properties since it came out right? I just don't see Java implementing this....it's very simple to implement (it compiles to get/set methods like java has now...) so they can't have been waiting for technical reasons...I think they just want to sit on their high horse and proclaim that their way is better. What other reason could they have?

Re:So what?

[marafa]

unfortunately, we have a test scenario with one developer trying to create a program that will run on both windows primarily and linux in the second place. if it works the application will be kept on linux. but his development platform and primary objective is windoze.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

> That is like open the gates of flames. Slow in which context, on which hardware, what app, what the load, to what are you comparing?

Slower on slower hardware, hardly needs to be said. Sluggish loadtime / UI response compared to the equivalent native app. Slow class loads, slow initial JIT compile compared to not having to do that at all, or perhaps compared to loading a "hot" cache of preloaded/compiled classes. (Is that possible yet?) Whip up a shitty do-nothing Swing app with a couple lazily loaded tabs, one empty and one holding a very complicated form. Click on the form's tab, the wait is slow even on new hardware. (Less slow if the class was loaded by a background loader (or not lazy loaded at all), but still slower than the next step:) Click to empty tab, click back to form. No waiting, now it's fast and usable. Go to netbeans tools->options. The wait is almost measurable in seconds. Close the options, and open it again. Fast. First impressions count!

Swing still sucks, even in native look&feel, it still doesn't feel native. In windows: Find a swing app with a table and drag around some colums, the behaviour isn't the same as native. Click on some swing menus, then click on the app's title bar to close the menu. Doesn't close like it should. Use their "native imitation" JFileChooser (or whatever) where nothing feels quite right: no filename autocomplete dropdown in the filename inputbox, not possible to sort by file details (eg date modified, size.) "Wow, I was almost convinced it was a native app! And with every JDK release, it's getting incrementally better!"

Of course, speed wise, everything's usable once an app is loaded and all the classes are JIT compiled (or whatever.) All this matters even less for webapps and enterprise stuff on fast machines with gobs of memory. Server performance is fine. It's all this initial slowness I talked about is what turns me off Java desktop apps. Azureus and Netbeans are great apps. I love netbeans, but goddamnit load faster!

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

getters/setters greatly increase readability. Properties are terrible. I hate the fact that I have to look up the property's documentation or wait for a compiler error to find out if a property is read, write or both. With a getter or setter method, it's plainly obvious.

Re:So what?

[filesiteguy]

Believe it or not, I use Google's Picasa. They have a dotwine version which works well in *nix. I just can't get FSpot to do anything other than display photos.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't give him much of a chance of success if you and most of your people still use the word "windoze". The 90s called... they want their lingo back.

Re:So what?

[filesiteguy]

Well, this is draining into a GTK discussion, but I've yet to see a GTK theme engine that doesn't look "blurry" and/or "fuzzy" as well as lacking any brightness. In addition, I've yet to see anyone implement a decent File Open/Save dialog box in a GTK app.

'nuff said.

Re:So what?

[GiMP]

> SWT is a pain to use, and doesn't support printing on any relevant platform.

What!? I wrote SWT apps that printed all the way back in 2000. It was easy as hell, and worked on Solaris, Linux, Windows, and Mac OS. What other relevant platforms did you mean?

Re:So what?

[mabinogi]

Picasa is pretty good, and is certainly more polished and finished than F-Spot, but F-Spot's export options are better than Picasa's and I like their approach to versioning better as well as the way they completely hide the filesystem from me.
F-Spot's editing interface needs to take some lessons from Picasa - it's a little more cumbersome than it needs to be.

I really like F-Spot's tagging interface. The "Albums" introduced (or maybe just made more obvious) in the latest Picasa aren't quite as easy or useful for me.

However, Picasa is certainly what I recommend to Windows using friends - either that or the full version of Photoshop Album, but Picasa usually wins out on price there ;)

Re:So what?

[mabinogi]

> if it's something everyone thinks then you can call it a fact.
No, then it's a widely held opinion. But still an opinion.

Re:So what?

[WWWWolf]

You know C# has had properties since it came out right? I just don't see Java implementing this....it's very simple to implement (it compiles to get/set methods like java has now...) so they can't have been waiting for technical reasons...I think they just want to sit on their high horse and proclaim that their way is better. What other reason could they have?

Exactly what in "had this since it came out" makes C# better? For comparison, Java had object orientation in it even before C# even came out, surely that makes it much better than C# with this logic! =)

In my opinion it doesn't matter when a language implements a good idea, as long as when it does it, it should do it properly. C# got this right on the first try. Java has to do it right on the first try, too, even if it means being late in the game. There's precious little room for error in specifying language; you can always fix code, but fixing a broken spec is much harder.

I'm only saying, they're just taking their time and making things integrate properly, probably. Java implemented generics and annotations already, and both were harder to do than getter/setter sugar. All in due time.

I'm only guessing it got lower priority because generating getters and setters is, like, four mouse clicks in Eclipse. =)

Re:So what?

[EsbenMoseHansen]

It doesn't work on Linux as of this spring... but I must admit I didn't check recently. (Checking). Oh my, it made it in july this year. Congratulations :o)

Re:So what?

[rdean400]

Yee-ha, the Write Once Run Anywhere debacle all over again.

At least Java's got certainty with regards to the IP. Mono's good to go until Microsoft decides that it's being too helpful to Linux in undermining Windows.

Re:So what?

[XMyth]

My previous comment had nothing to do with C# being better (I really only said properties because that's my main beef with Java and I've seen it mentioned a few times before...though I don't have much/any real java experience).

I was replying to "And undoubtedly, Java will follow soon =)" but I guess you were talking about Ruby's syntax which from what I understand (which may be wrong) doesn't seem to buy you much beyond the functionality of a field wrapper in getter/setter's.

IMHO, the value of properties isn't apparent when writing the code (though it is nice to have both get/set blocks in one parent block for the property)...but it's apparent when using the code.

Either way...4 mouse clicks? man, I'd kill myself if I had to touch the mouse that much....but I guess VS.NET 2005 has me spoiled. :)

Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[AuMatar]

So now not only do we have to wait for submarine patents on C# and the runtime, now they can hit us on anything in their API as well. Especially with the Novell deal, people ought to realize that MS is just waiting for a chance to use their patents against open source. This is turning a bad idea worse. Just say no to Mono.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[MaXiMiUS]

Just say no to Mono.

I don't think you need to tell Slashdotters that, it is called the kissing disease, after all.

Yes, I know, different Mono. I stand by my statement ;)

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[nurb432]

I tend to agree totally.

While the concept of what mono offered was a great idea, the risks are far greater. just choose something like python instead. Its also cross compatible and i dont think the rug can be pulled out from underneath you at the last minute.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Anonymous Coward]

Could patents be used to completely disable Mono?

First some background information.

The .NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.

Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms.

The Mono project has gone beyond both of those components and has developed and integrated third party class libraries, the most important being: Debugging APIs, integration with the Gnome platform (Accessibility, Pango rendering, Gdk/Gtk, Glade, GnomeUI), Mozilla, OpenGL, extensive database support (Microsoft only supports a couple of providers out of the box, while Mono has support for 11 different providers), our POSIX integration libraries and finally the embedded API (used to add scripting to applications and host the CLI, or for example as an embedded runtime in Apache).

The core of the .NET Framework, and what has been patented by Microsoft falls under the ECMA/ISO submission. Jim Miller at Microsoft has made a statement on the patents covering ISO/ECMA, (he is one of the inventors listed in the patent): http://web.archive.org/web/20030609164123/http://m ailserver.di.unipi.it/pipermail/dotnet-sscli/msg00 218.html.

Basically a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose.

The controversial elements are the ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms subsets. Those are convenient for people who need full compatibility with the Windows platform, but are not required for the open source Mono platform, nor integration with today's Mono's rich support of Linux.

The Mono strategy for dealing with these technologies is as follows: (1) work around the patent by using a different implementation technique that retains the API, but changes the mechanism; if that is not possible, we would (2) remove the pieces of code that were covered by those patents, and also (3) find prior art that would render the patent useless.

Not providing a patented capability would weaken the interoperability, but it would still provide the free software / open source software community with good development tools, which is the primary reason for developing Mono.

The patents do not apply in countries where software patents are not allowed.

For Linux server and desktop development, we only need the ECMA components, and things that we have developed (like Gtk#) or Apache integration.

With the new Novell/Microsoft agreement, will the patent policy change?

Mono is a community project, and as such, we will continue to implement the policy of not integrating knowingly infringing code into Mono.

And we will continue to follow the steps outlined in the previous topic if code that potentially infringes is found: finding prior art, finding different implementation techniques, or if none of those are possible, removing the code from Mono.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[RealSurreal]

A week ago I would have said you were a paranoid, FUD-spreading nutjob but now I have to agree with you. Novell have sold themselves out and I'm going to be deeply suspicious of anything they do from now on.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[debackerl]

Stop spreading FUD about patents. Microsoft will likely never attack because Novell could counter-attack using the Open Invention Network. If you never heard about OIN, just google for "Mono patent OIN". Also up to now Microsoft has never been hostile to this new implementation. Of course this does not mean they would never attack, but they know what would happen to them in that case. Also Mono take care of doing clean-room implementation to have a pretty clean implementation.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent troll. MS has released all patents relating to the .NET framework for public use. The Mono website itself even mentions that specifically.

Stop the FUD.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Richard W.M. Jones]

Can someone please tell me, which patents is Microsoft alleging that Mono infriges? Patent numbers please, not general assertions or FUD.

Rich.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would Novell do that? They just entered a deal with MS that gave them clear light to use their patents. Mono + Novell is a great combination, patents on Mono are only a problem if you want to run your mono application on another Linux distribution. Do you really think Novell is going to care if Redhat or Ubuntu customers get sued?

Clean room implementation help against copyright infringement but not patent infringement.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[segedunum]

The .NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.

NO. Microsoft has made it abundantly clear that when you implement the the ECMA stuff, and your own CLR, you are entering into a RAND agreement with Microsoft, and they have patents essential to the running of it:

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/mai n/0,14179,2887217,00.html

This was pointed out years ago. No, how long does this agreement last? The answer is, as long as Microsoft wants it to. Should Microsoft revoke this agreement, or initiate a revocation, then the worst that will happen is that the ECMA standards will be revoked. The ECMA wording on this is pathetically weak and under no circumstances gives a legally binding long-term guarantee. This is why we had all that rubbish about a 'letter from Microsoft' that didn't materialise some time back:

http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/codeofco nduct.htm

The whole 'ECMA is safe' thing is what the Mono people would have you believe. It isn't. The RAND stuff is double speak, because Microsoft do have patents that are specific to implementing .Net, CLR, the ECMA stuff etc. Not Java or anything else - just .Net. The e-mail quoted above basically means nothing.

It's actually more likely that the Microsoft specific stuff like ADO.Net, ASP.Net and Windows.Forms are safer since these are only namespaces in an API, although their patents basically say that if you're implementing .Net stuff and running it in a CLR then it applies. Fairly clever actually. They're saying that if you want to implement some of the stuff in a JVM or something, then that's OK, but if you're cloning a Microsoft compatible .Net then it applies to you.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[penix1]

Can someone please tell me, which patents is Microsoft alleging that Mono infriges? Patent numbers please, not general assertions or FUD.

My guess would be one of these:

Microsoft+winforms patent search.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[sproketboy]

How does an anon-coward get modded informative? This clown is clearly one of the dilusionists on the mono team.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[msobkow]

My understanding is the core libraries/packages/whatever-the-buzzword-of-the-we ek-is and the syntax of C# are specified by the ECMA standard. This is analagous to the ANSI specs that cover C++ syntax as well as core libraries and STL.

But as with ANSI C++, a language and base libraries is a very, very small part of a complete application environment. It's nice that the Mono team is redeveloping compatible APIs, but that won't prevent the same game that eventually killed OS/2: Every time IBM's team got the Win32 changes incorporated, a new update would be released for some critical component to render OS/2's Win32 APIs temporarily incompatible. I have absolutely zero faith that the same won't happen with Mono -- when the time is right for Microsoft.

Even if Microsoft doesn't utilize any legal weapons or "traps", the next service pack that updates .Net could leave Mono in the cold, destroying the credibility of C#.NET as a cross-platform tool. Microsoft can play innocent easily in such a case, because they specifically did not include a lot of useful APIs in the ECMA standard.

Personally I don't understand why anyone would bother with a "cross platform" tool that doesn't seem to be deployed on any non-Intel platforms. How is anyone supposed to deploy a .NET service on some serious hardware? Not to knock x86 servers -- I just don't like being forced to choose one particular CPU just to get Mono.NET, especially if that forces renegotiating existing contracts for RDBMS and other third party products.

For now I'll stick with Java. It's the only truly cross-platform option right now that doesn't require major macro hacking to maintain cross-platform portability without modifying code as part of the build process (a major no-no in many environments. Check out and compile, changes not permitted.)

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[kimvette]

Microsoft proposed C# as an open standard for anyone to lose and implement. If They try to sue anyone for implementing C# wouldn't they risk running into RICO and fraud issues?

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[mikaelhg]

Very nice astroturf! Which PR company do you have to hire to be able to push this kind of astroturf and get it upmodded by sock puppet accounts?

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Douglas Goodall]

Thank You!! I spent about a week reading the ECMA documents, and the fluffy web pages about ECMA. The descriptive pages explicitly state that the documents contain material covered by Patents held by ECMA member companies and that they have agreed to RAND or the materials would not have been accepted into the standards. I have been trying to tell people about this ever since I read it. No one wants to believe me. IANABCL but IMNSHO and FWIW the ECMA docments are nothing more than a Troll Trap, provided in convenient PDF format. I have been waiting patiently for the S*** to hit the fan. I emailed the FSF about this months ago and they never replied to me. Your point is well taken and I back you up all the way.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[AuMatar]

No. There's no law that says a standard can't have patents. The only time it can't is when the people creating the standard sign an agreement to disclose all patents beforehand- which is why RAMBUS got in trouble. Standard!=patent free.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Richard W.M. Jones]

That just gives loads of strange irrelevant patents on electronic ink and the link. What actual patents are infringing?

The point here is that Microsoft hasn't actually specified any patents. Maybe they exist, maybe they don't. Maybe they're valid, or maybe they're overbroad rubbish which are worth challenging. Compare and contrast Adobe's PDF license which is very clear about precisely which patents are being infringed.

Microsoft is FUDding like mad, and we're being taken in by it.

Rich.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Richard W.M. Jones]

My understanding is the core libraries/packages/whatever-the-buzzword-of-the-we ek-is and the syntax of C# are specified by the ECMA standard. This is analagous to the ANSI specs that cover C++ syntax as well as core libraries and STL.

Well, your "understanding" is wrong. It is not possible to patent a programming language, library, package or API. You may be able to patent tiny parts of a standard if those parts are innovative and non-obvious, but I seriously doubt that anything in C#, .Net or its libraries is in any way new. People have been doing this stuff since the 70s.

What actual patents does Microsoft allege Mono infringes? Patent numbers, not FUD and vague assertions as you have made above.

Rich.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[daniel_yokomiso]

Doesn't Mono stands for: "Microsoft?!? Oh no!"?

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[segedunum]

Well, your "understanding" is wrong. It is not possible to patent a programming language, library, package or API. Why not? Microsoft have patented the CLR environment all this stuff runs in.

What actual patents does Microsoft allege Mono infringes?

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P TO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch- bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=common+language+runti me&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PG01

Have a read through that lot. This is what Mono has entered into a RAND agreement with Microsoft with.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Richard W.M. Jones]

Those are patent applications. You can write any old nonsense in a patent application.

Please read carefully what I said in my posting above before bothering to reply. It wasn't about whether Microsoft had patent applications, or has even managed to hoodwink the USPTO in granted some faulty patents, but whether they are ever going to specify what patents they allege that Mono infringes. At that point pubpat or a similar organisation can make a serious effort to get the invalid patents overturned. Until then it's all just FUD.

Rich.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[segedunum]

Those are patent applications. You can write any old nonsense in a patent application.

That's a very weak argument. It hasn't stopped many such patents becoming recognised by everyone and being approved. The facts are that they are there.

Please read carefully what I said in my posting above before bothering to reply.

You alleged that it was impossible to patent an API or a programming language. That's rubbish. Others have done it, and the way that Microsoft has done it, they're saying that it applies if you are running it within a CLR and something that follows the ECMA specification. Not wthin a JVM or another environment. It is quite specific.

It's more likely that those applications that remain will be approved.

It wasn't about whether Microsoft had patent applications, or has even managed to hoodwink the USPTO in granted some faulty patents, but whether they are ever going to specify what patents they allege that Mono infringes.

Read my orginal reply fully before replying. You do not understand this.

They don't need to. That's the whole point. The fact is that when you implement a CLR that adheres to the ECMA specifications you are entering into a RAND agreement and license with them to implement that standard, and the ECMA have made that clear themselves as well. No if, buts or "Oh, we'll get this overturned later." The fact that there is a RAND agreement means that the ECMA believes that there are patents to license, and even if there aren't, nothing stops Microsoft from making some and adding them later.

At that point pubpat or a similar organisation can make a serious effort to get the invalid patents overturned.

It's highly unlikely that these will be overturned. For a start, if you read them they are specific to .Net and specific to running things in a CLR etc. They are not broad patents that apply to .Net, Java and all and sundry. For example, implementing an ADO.Net namespace in a JVM is not something they're interested in. It's Microsoft protecting their own invention and IP. These are not normal patents that we've seen.

Until then it's all just FUD.

It's FUD that Microsoft has come up with, with more of a firm basis than we've seen before, and the people vainly trying to defend Mono and claim that nothing is wrong have fell for it.

I find it really funny that the people defending Mono are actually having to defend Microsoft and this activity, and that they're not doing anything wrong.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[msobkow]

Please read before ranting.

I said they're part of the ECMA standard. I said absolutely nothing about whether specific patents were relevant or actionable, nor about how many there might be involved.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[msobkow]

That's rich -- you complaining that someone didn't "read carefully" after the way you tried to spin my points into an argument about patents.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Richard W.M. Jones]

Really please read at least a little bit about patents before you spout more nonsense.

Rich.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[segedunum]

Really please read at least a little bit about patents before you spout more nonsense.

Just the sort of comment I was expecting in reply ;-). Case closed.

Re:Great, even more ways for MS to kill it

[Anonymous Coward]

The core of the .NET Framework, and what has been patented by Microsoft falls under the ECMA/ISO submission. Jim Miller at Microsoft has made a statement on the patents covering ISO/ECMA, (he is one of the inventors listed in the patent): http://web.archive.org/web/20030609164123/http://m ailserver.di.unipi.it/pipermail/dotnet-sscli/msg00 218.html.

Basically a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose.

Mere "one inventor" does not have the legal standing within the company to make that statement, much less the grant. Can you come up with something official and legally binding, instead of a mailing list post by meaningless Mr. Nobody?

Maybe I can Finally Get Imeem Running ON Linux

[illectro]

Since the linux version is forever a 'coming soon' rumour, maybe mono will let imeem work on my Ubuntu box.

Re:Maybe I can Finally Get Imeem Running ON Linux

[speculatrix]

yeah, right about the time the new Duke Nukem is released for quad-core x86-64 technology with support for 3D holographic displays using quantum computer acceleration units.

Re:Maybe I can Finally Get Imeem Running ON Linux

[penix1]

You forgot Faster Than Light(FTL) processors....Can't run Duke Nukem without it...

Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux. VS.Net and Mono allow me to use the same code with very little tweaking between platforms and keep using my Visual BASIC skills I learned over a decade ago.

Windows Forums means I don't have to rewrite part of the program that uses forms for Linux.

I hope this gets more VS.Net developers porting over to Linux using Mono. Linux can really use more easy to use and easy to develop applications without having to learn kernel hacking and methods that exist only for Linux. This is a good thing and maybe the corporations will decide to have some Linux workstations if they can develop VB.Net applications for them the same way they develop them for Windows.

Re:Very good!

[febuiles]

Mmm, maybe its just taste or being just too tied to one platform, but I for one find development on Linux/BSD OSs much easier than Windows. I like to fire up Emacs and just start producing, knowing that I'll have autotools, my compilers (or interpreters) ready, not having to use some bloated solutions like MS Visual Studio, Borland tools or even worse, having to download a bunch of Cygwin packages just to "feel like home". Tastes I guess.

Re:Very good!

[shura57]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux. VS.Net and Mono allow me to use the same code with very little tweaking between platforms and keep using my Visual BASIC skills I learned over a decade ago.

The python + gtk allow you to do the same. Why hold on to Visual BASIC, if it's shitty in the first place?

Re:Very good!

[RealSurreal]

Have you looked at job ads lately? Hundreds of VB(.net) jobs for every Python job.

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux. VS.Net and Mono allow me to use the same code with very little tweaking between platforms and keep using my Visual BASIC skills I learned over a decade ago.

or... you can learn Java, Ruby, Python, Tcl/Tk, or (god forbid) C++! and improve your skills in the process. Ah, and you can always use Gambas and learn nothing.

Re:Very good!

[SanityInAnarchy]

"Windows Forums"?

You know, this has been my major concern with Mono -- moronic Visual Basic programmers migrating to Linux. And if spelling isn't enough:

Linux can really use more easy to use and easy to develop applications without having to learn kernel hacking and methods that exist only for Linux.

Most software I use can be compiled with very little modification between Linux or OS X (using X11). I'm a Linux developer and I rarely touch kernel code, and then, only for fun. We have a local radio station that's running entirely on Ubuntu, without touching the kernel.

Implying that Linux development requires kernel hacking is worse than moronic -- it's infectiously moronic. You're spreading FUD, intentionally or not.

And may I ask, what is it that's stopped you from doing exactly what you described, but with Java instead of Mono/.NET?

Oh well, there's always the decent stuff: Beagle.

Re:Very good!

[HiThere]

If that's what you want, use Java, Ruby, Python, or some other approach.

This one looks too dangerous to risk. It *MIGHT* be safe... but "do you feel lucky?".

MS has issued a clear warning that is some project becomes popular, they will bankrupt it. Exactly which patents might be used aren't obvious, but there have long been suspicions that MS has some patents covering parts of .net which are ostensibly "Well, the API is open. Build it if you can." This contract with Novell right before the release of a version of mono with WinForms rather suggests that Novell is being used as a stalking horse.

Re:Very good!

[qbwiz]

And not one of those VB jobs that I would want to work on. Of course, I may not always get the choice...

Re:Very good!

[AJWM]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux.

Then learn some standard languages (Perl, Python, C++, Java...) and portable toolkits (Qt, Wx, etc), not Microsoft's proprietary stuff.

Visual BASIC skills

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Linux can really use more easy to use and easy to develop applications without having to learn kernel hacking

Uh, right. Not sure where you get the idea that developing apps using the IDEs, languages and toolkits available for Linux has anything to do with kernel hacking. Have you ever even used Linux?

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait a minute... are we talking about what people should learn in order to get employment on an existing legacy project, or what they should use in order to do a job (assuming they're in the position to make that decision)?

You kind of changed the subject there.

Re:Very good!

[Shados]

VB.NET isn't VB6. Its a totally different architecture, with a (rarely used, aside when porting apps) compatibility layer (not an emulator or anything, just stuff to make syntax work), and similar keywords. The language, constructs and syntax structure is so similar to other languages (especialy C#) that you can use javascript applets on the net to convert between the two

VB6 and previous were shitty. VB.NET is good stuff that looks shitty.

Re:Very good!

[Tim C]

I like to fire up Emacs and just start producing, knowing that I'll have autotools, my compilers (or interpreters) ready, not having to use some bloated solutions like MS Visual Studio, Borland tools

Yes, that's a matter of personal taste. Me, I do Java development, and if pressed can do so using nothing more than vi and ant. I'll take Eclipse over that any day of the week, though. Similarly, I work with people who are the exact opposite, using Eclipse only when they absolutely have to.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

Point is you already know the environment and languages you work in. I am talking about convincing people used to Windows and VB.Net to start developing on Linux that don't have your knowledge or skills. They'd get lost in Linux if they were forced to use and learn EMacs, Perl, and GCC and a brand new IDE that they don't know how to use yet. There is a learning curve there that keeps them away from Linux, and Mono helps them use an environment they are already used to using.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

Because if I entered the Python market, I'd be a beginner and not be able to get a job with it until I get experience with Python. But seriously who is going to hire a Python developer with less than a year's experience anyway? I got over a decade and a half with Windows and Visual BASIC and a ton of knowledge and experience that I cannot just throw away because someone who cannot even find a job that gets paid as well as I do with Visual BASIC, is trying to tell me that Visual BASIC sucks. I mean really, you want me to give up $150,000USD a year contract jobs with Visual BASIC, just to get those $30,000USD a year jobs with Python? Now which one sucks?

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

Well then I hope you don't mind unemployment. Some of us like to have steady paychecks and be able to pay our bills and own a house and raise a family. I mean maybe you can code Python for food some day and some open source dotcom will take pity on you and hire you, until the public investing in them notices that they have an Underpants Gnomes Business Plan:

#1 Develop hot new technology in Python.
#2 ?
#3 Profit!

Then you'll all be on the street with "Willing to code Python for food" signs and living in cardboard boxes with your "Visual BASIC sucks" T-Shirts.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

Java, performance issues, and Sun suing any company that tried to have their own version of Java. Plus Java apps are really buggy in IE and Firefox.

I tried to learn Java with 1.1, and then 2.0 came out, and then Java started to release a lot of upgrades and updates.

I've actually compiled some C++ programs in Linux using gcc, stuff like modem drivers that require kernel headers that don't compile correctly without some tweaking. Other programs as well, forcing me to download the RPM tarballs because I don't know enough about the Linux kernel to make changes to those kernel header source code files. Then when I do upgrade the kernel, the programs I had before are now broken and need to be recompiled. It is not FUD, it is facts and I have experience with Linux since 1995. I would have developed in Linux already with gcc and Java, but my bad experiences with those languages has sort of scared me away from them. Plus when I went to ask for help on forums, I got called a n00b and was called a lot of bad names and flamed to death. So trying to get decent help from the Linux community, did not work out for me very well. So I went back to the basics, Visual BASIC.

Re:Very good!

[Johnno74]

Don't count on your visual basic skills you learned "over a decade ago" helping you out much. VB.Net syntax is similar to old-school vb5-6, but writing apps for the .net framework is a completely different kettle of fish. The difference between C# and vb.net is tiny compared with the difference between vb6 and vb7 (vb.net)

You can still hack something ugly together with vb.net (or c#) in a hurry, but if you want to do it right you have to take a different approach.

Re:Very good!

[Quarters]

What good are your decade old Visual Basic skills when the entire concept and syntax of the language changed between VB6 and VB.NET? They're entirely different. VB.NET shares more in common (quite a lot, really) with C# than it does with VB6.

Re:Very good!

[McNihil]

It is a poor programmer if he/she/it only programs in one language.

Re:Very good!

[shura57]

Says who? and by what criteria? BTW, I didn't call you names. I guess I should have.

Re:Very good!

[shura57]

I don't want you to do anything. You said that you want to develop cross-platform and I pointed out that Python does the job. Nowhere in your original post was money an issue.

I guess 30K sucks compared to 150K, but this is irrelevant to languages themselves.

Re:Very good!

[EvanED]

You know, I'm a huge fan of Emacs... I use it as my primary editor, I'm running Emacs 22 from CVS with the Emacs Code Browser. But it might just be because I'm new at using ECB and Semantic and those types of tools, but I'd take a full-fledged IDE any day. I like being able to right click on an identifier and go right to its definition, and not have to worry that TAGS didn't understand what was going on, or that it was in a file that's almost the same but in a different directory. I haven't even figured out how to click on an include file and jump to it. (BTW, like I said, I'm new at this, and I haven't really found a good "here's how to set up this tool" page. It's mostly along the lines of a lot of Unix documentation where it almost seems like to understand what it says you already have to know what it's talking about. So if you know how to set it up so that I can do these things, please let me know. If you want, give me an email and I can give you more information about my setup.)

Let alone the other things that a good IDE will give you like refactoring support.

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

For anyone that hasn't noticed, this guy is a FUD-spewing troll.

Please don't take them seriously.

Thanks,
The Mgt.

Re:Very good!

[Nataku564]

Java, performance issues

Might you cite some source of these nebulous performance issues? Unless you are using like java 1, you won't be having any of these....

I tried to learn Java with 1.1

Oh, well, see that explains it. You might want to compare Java 1.1 with something equivalent from Microsoft at the time, like VB6, which is ungodly slow. The current incarnation of Java, like VB .Net, has undergone massive improvements.

Plus Java apps are really buggy in IE and Firefox.

These are "applets", not "apps". They aren't really used much anymore. Still fun to play with, though.

stuff like modem drivers that require kernel headers

Precisely how many kernel modules have you compiled on windows? Yes, generally kernel modules / drivers are tricky to get to work, but ... thats just the way they are. Some pretty fun low level stuff is going on in there, that affects how your computer does basic operations, so I would anticipate it being a bit hard to get those to work. Everyone gives you precompiled stuff for windows, so you never have to see any of the effort that goes into making those work.

Plus when I went to ask for help on forums, I got called a n00b and was called a lot of bad names and flamed to death.

I wonder why ...

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a fucking idiot. The guy stated his personal preference, he didn't say you should quit your job. Grow the fuck up.

Re:Very good!

[abradsn]

You are an idiot. Because some1 spells something wrng you thnk that you R smart. They had valid pointz and you are just an idiot.

Re:Very good!

[Nataku564]

Unfortunately, too late for me. I read his comment history after I hit submit ... ah well.

Re:Very good!

[abradsn]

That is not a good thing if you already have code written. Besides, the languages you mention might (read do) have pitfalls that others don't share. I don't want to port 100k or 200k lines of code to Python. It would be quicker and shorter to write my own compiler or in this case... use one that someone else wrote for that operating system.

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

And may I ask, what is it that's stopped you from doing exactly what you described, but with Java instead of Mono/.NET?

From a personal standpoint, I think that C# and the .Net libraries are better designed than Java. This is getting into language holy wars though. But I'm very excited that there's this option now, because previously I'd have probably gone for C++ and Qt for cross-platform gui work.

Re:Very good!

[edmicman]

Ummmmm, last time I checked programming languages weren't a religion, as much as some around here like to think so. They're just tools, tools used to get a job done. I would think the smart man would use whatever tool is best for the job, and train himself in that which is most lucrative.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

But why learn Python, when I am more skilled at Visual BASIC and Visual BASIC exists now for Linux in Mono? What reason would I possibly have to take time out of my already busy schedule to learn a new language and framework, instead of using one that I already know?

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

This is why open source does not catch on. The negative attitudes towards anyone different or trying to learn new things. The very things that show me I am dealing with sociopaths online that turned me away from learning open source technologies for the past decade.

I know Visual BASIC, Mono allows me to use Visual BASIC in Linux. So some open source sociopath tells me that I must learn Python because Visual BASIC sucks, so I respond in kind that me switching to Python like he uses would not be good for me economically due to the job situations. Now I got a sociopath like you calling me an idiot. Nice job, you set back the open source movement five years with your shitty attitude! People like you make me want to stay with Windows, and stay away from Linux Sociopaths like you.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

The technology is old because I tried to learn it when it was new.

You missed my point in that the open source community is not very helpful and would rather be sociopaths to new people trying to learn the technologies rather than help them out. Notice how instead of trying to help me learn, you use personal attacks on me instead. Nice job, really nice, you'll have everyone on the planet running Linux and programming Python and Java with that attitude. Just like PopCopy from the first episode of Dave Chappelle's show, drive away the customers with a negative attitude and behavior.

If only the open source community had helped me in 1995 - 2000 I would have been coding in Java or Python by now. But they aren't helpful at all, and they write manuals like they are high on crack or pot, and the manuals make no logical sense, and yet they tell people to RTFM anyway. Might as well be written in Klingon.

Re:Very good!

[shura57]

Sheesh, don't learn python :-)

I had no idea about the job and busy schedule. I thought you're looking for a nice tool that allows you to develop apps on all platforms. How would I know that you had more in mind than just that :-)

Next thing you'll say that you're proficient with the cyrillic keyboard and the programming language has to accept statements in cyrillic :-) Just kidding.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

That is ok, I know you are not a mind reader and had no idea that I didn't have a lot of free time to learn a new language. I am a Jamaican and I work three jobs mon, four if you count the part-time job I have at the help desk.

I know that most open source programmers here are really following the rules of open source programming and the rules say to discourage people from learning open source technology for "job security", etc.

Re:Very good!

[jlarocco]

I hope this gets more VS.Net developers porting over to Linux using Mono. Linux can really use more easy to use and easy to develop applications without having to learn kernel hacking and methods that exist only for Linux. This is a good thing and maybe the corporations will decide to have some Linux workstations if they can develop VB.Net applications for them the same way they develop them for Windows.

Wow. MS has you hook, line and sinker.

If I write an app in Python, Ruby, Perl, C or C++ and use Qt, Gtk, wxWidgets or Tk for the GUI, the app will usually run on Linux, *BSD, OS X, and Windows without modification. Same with Java and SWT or Swing. No legally questionable third party add-ins required. If VB.Net lusers want to write cross-platform apps, they shouldn't be using VB.

And kernel hacking is necessary under Linux in the exact same situations where it would be necessary under Windows. It's irrelevant in the context of application development.

Re:Very good!

[SanityInAnarchy]

Notice how instead of trying to help me learn, you use personal attacks on me instead.

Notice how you didn't exactly give an opening for us to teach you anything, other than (for instance) Java 2.0 doesn't have the performance issues that Java 1.1 did. Or, if you try really hard, maybe you'll get that we're trying to teach you things like what to expect from any OS, and what kind of attitude you should come into forums and IRC with.

Hint: Actually ask a question if you want help. Call us hate-mongering flame-happy nerds, and we'll probably flame you.

If only the open source community had helped me in 1995 - 2000 I would have been coding in Java or Python by now.

Are you actually implying that Microsoft is helping you now? Or Sun?

I'd rather have source code be my "manual" than get the kind of "help" Microsoft tries to give me.

Re:Very good!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Then learn some standard languages (Perl, Python, C++, Java...) and portable toolkits (Qt, Wx, etc), not Microsoft's proprietary stuff."

Name 3 popular Windows apps that use one of those portable toolkits... I thought so.

Re:Very good!

[pornflakes]

Opera.
Skype.
Google Earth.

Re:Very good!

[Dom2]

Yes, that's because a recruiter posted the same job hundreds of times.

Re:Very good!

[WWWWolf]

I'm a Linux developer and I rarely touch kernel code, and then, only for fun.

Rarely? =) You know, in a modern operating system, most application developers should never have the need to touch kernel code. Linux is a modern operating system in this respect. Linux application developers touch kernel code just as often as Windows application developers. Actually, I'd wager Linux application developers touch kernel code much less than Windows developers - people aren't asking Linux folks to develop really screwy copy protection methods that need device driver-level access to run =)

I've been tinkering with Linux for a decade, writing random hacks to do whatever I've needed to do, and never once needed to develop a kernel module. Linux kernel is voodoo stuff that luckily has a build system - three cheers to Debian folks for make-kpkg...

Re:Very good!

[Haeleth]

I like to fire up Emacs and just start producing, [...] not having to use some bloated solutions

Um...

Re:Very good!

[Dan Ost]

No, sadly, the smart man is required to use whatever tool is the corporate standard
for that type of development, even though the corporate standard was created by
people who don't even understand the buzzwords in it.

The lucky man is in a position to actually choose his tools for the job.

Re:Very good!

[vhogemann]

http://www.zope.org/

Zope, an Application server written with Python.

At least here at Brazil it has a good acceptance, and there are good oportunities for pyhton developers here.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

I asked legitimate questions. I stated that Mono 1.2 helps me in my situation to develop Linux applications. Then I get FUD thrown at me by you and your "friends" as well as personal attacks and other fallacies. I get told that "Visual BASIC sucks, use Python instead" and now that "Sun and Microsoft do not help developers like you because their online resources and books they publish are not as good as the works written by flamelords of whom you now are in communication with."

Don't be stupid of course I get better help from Sun and Microsoft than flamelords and trolls like you. Microsoft has MSDN online for free and other free online resources and Visual BASIC.Net 2005 Express edition for free, and Sun has SDKs and online documentation for free. Admit it, you are just following the rules of open source programming in trying to discourage people from learning open source technology for your own job security.

Re:Very good!

[turgid]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux.

Haven't you heard of Java and Netbeans?

Re:Very good!

[SanityInAnarchy]

You're absolutely right, except you apparently didn't finish reading my sentence: and then, only for fun.

I don't need to touch kernel code at all. Sometimes I like to anyway.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

I looked at Zope before, it showed promise. I could not find any resources in learning it. I heard it can be used with PHP, which I also tried to learn when it was PHP 3.0 and my code broke when 4.0 came out. You see I know something of some open source languages but every time I asked for help, I was driven away by sociopathic open source trolls. I mean I was only trying to learn something new, and now I have a phobia of learning open source languages. Mono 1.2 helps me in that it allows me to write Visual BASIC.Net open source programs for Linux without having to learn anything new. I can always learn something new later.

Re:Very good!

[SanityInAnarchy]

I asked legitimate questions.

No, you didn't. Not here. Not a single of your comments in this thread has so much as a question mark. I just checked. Am I wrong?

I don't know if you asked legitimate questions of the community before, but if you had an attitude then at all similar to your attitude now, I'm not surprised people didn't want to help. This is not a personal attack, just an observation, take it however you like.

Then I get FUD thrown at me by you and your "friends" as well as personal attacks and other fallacies.

Forgive me for stooping to your level, but you started it.

Please, check your facts before you imply that Mono is necessary for writing portable Linux apps without touching kernel code. You are the only Linux developer I've ever talked to that made such a ludicrous claim.

I get told that "Visual BASIC sucks, use Python instead" and now that "Sun and Microsoft do not help developers like you because their online resources and books they publish are not as good as the works written by flamelords of whom you now are in communication with."

Search for those phrases, I dare you. They weren't said until you just said them now.

I invite you to actually read what was said, and try to hear what we are really saying, and not what you expect us to say.

I'm going to ignore your second paragraph for now. Your use of uncyclopedia suggests that your whole post is, itself, a satire. If you really think I'm a troll and you're not, let's both agree to not act like trolls. I'll start with this post.

Re:Very good!

[Orion Blastar]

The forms/forums was a Freudian Slip. I have a history of being flamed at open source forums and I saw that as a comedic opportunity to lead to an even more funnier joke when someone tries to correct the spelling mistake and misses the Freudian Slip, and the joke, which goes right over their head anyway. I mean it only goes to show how the person who corrected my spelling mistake thinks with his/her emotions instead of logic and reason and totally missed the satire.

Re:Very good!

[EastCoastSurfer]

Well said. So many people have told me they wanted to try to use OSS or some other non-windows solutions, but then they run into this elitist attitude which turns them off. You tell ask a windows person about a windows solutions and they are falling all over themselves to help you. Asking a linux person about linux often gets you a STFU, RTFM. Now which solution do you think someone is going to normally pick?

Re:Very good!

[cheesybagel]

Ok, I'll bite. Microsoft changes their platform so often, you are better off picking a platform which actually has kept compatibility ever since version one and works in Windows, Linux, MacOS X. Like Java. Heck, you even have free high quality development tools like the Eclipse or NetBeans IDEs.

If you want to use Mono, sure. Just do not get into an hissy fit next time Microsoft decides to completely change the language dropping backwards compatibility, or even dumping it by the wayside. Like they did to QuickBASIC, VB 6.0 and so on. Oh yeah, VB.NET support in Mono sucks. Guess what, they care more about C#.

Re:Very good!

[alienmole]

You're stretching pretty hard to look for excuses not to learn open source technologies. Let's accept your hypothesis that their are sociopaths in open source. I have a simple suggestion to deal with them: ignore them! Saying "People like you want me to stay with Windows" makes as much sense as an overweight person saying "People like you make me want to eat a pint of ice cream".

Indeed.

[Shados]

This is a pretty cool project, and its coming along nicely. I really want to see it succeed, because that would allow me to spread my skills to a wider array of customers. Unfortunately, in its current state, MONO is only a partial implementation of .NET 1. And honestly: .NET 1 was garbage, and the vast majority of software that had the unfortunate badluck of being developped under it have been upgraded to the excellent .NET 2 by now (it is rare that apps get updated that quickly, for example between different java version.).

And now with .NET 3 out (which is only an extension of .NET 2, not an actual new version of the framework...dumbass marketing idiots at microsoft), .NET 2 is even more important.

Re:Indeed.

[Shados]

Ok, before someone wacks me with a stick. Seems like Mono after all does have partial .NET 2 features. They should be careful though...I see on their roadmap ASP.NET 2.0... while C# and such are under ECMA standards (I beleive), ASP.NET technologies are partially patented and not given out as a standard for anyone to play with. Playing with fire there.

Re:Indeed.

[rkcth]

I'm a developer who uses both .NET 3.0 and previous version. I'm very glad that they decided to call it .Net 3.0 and not just an extension to 2.0. It makes it much easier to explain to customers.

Re:Indeed.

[XMyth]

Why do you say .NET 1 was garbage? I'm really curious. I've using .NET since Beta1 and I really didn't have any big problems with .NET 1.0. 2.0 added some great stuff for sure (generics and anonymous methods, YES!) but I didn't feel .NET 1.0 was lacking in any great way.

Re:Indeed.

[Anonymous Coward]

If Mono only supports .NET 1.0 then how come I was able to use 2.0-style iterators with the yield keyword? A .NET 2.0 feature. (And a pretty non-trivial one to implement.)

Re:Indeed.

[Shados]

Well, the ADO.NET model was fairly bad, asynchroneous execution support was poor, no generic, no nullable types, VB.NET didn't support automatic documentation. The framework's architecture assumed a lot of generated code, but without a good way to deal with it (partial classes). Lack of 2 way databinding, making all the RAD-like features 95% useless in corporate environments. And so on and so on. A lot of the architecture of the API was also remenecent (spelling?) of the old Microsoft-style MFC/VB6, keeping the same weaknesses. A lot of them have been fixed in .NET 2, but still there's a bunch left (Like how the System.Drawing namespace relies a lot on GDI, and uses Enumerations for configurations, instead of the Strategy pattern to allow us to extend it).

Thats for the language. ASP.NET 1 is really where the garbage was (the above was mostly that the languages weren't mature enough). The page model was horrible in every ways, shape, or forms.

Visual Studio 2002/2003 was a fairly poor and feature-lacking IDE, too (and lets face it: in the microsoft world, the IDE is part of the environment).

I guess the reason I felt that way, was that Java 1.5 came out not that long after .NET 1, and had most of the features above, so when came time to pick a framework, you had on one side a free (not "Free") framework that can run on most relevent platforms, and has all the features you'll want, and on the other side, you have an obviously feature-lacking framework that is -bound- to get a major overhaul, thus crippling your investments, and it only runs on one platform to boot.

If you did .NET 1 in Windows Form or services, its not so bad. It wasn't adequate, but it was to be expected from a version 1. If a company did ASP.NET (not counting web services), I really feel like they wasted a lot of money. Yes, you can upgrade it relatively easily: however, ASP.NET 2 allows for much better and cleaner software architectures, the like that were not possible in 1.1. Adding new components to a large scale apps using 2.0 architecture when the app was started under 1.0/1.1 means that your architecture will be fairly consistant. AKA: You're screwed.

Don't get me wrong, if you look at my posting history, I'm starting to have a reputation to being a Microsoft butt kisser, so I'm definately not biaised against them. I just feel .NET 2.0 should have been the first version, as it is truly a good product (which is why 3.0 is just an extension of 2.0, as it should be), while 1.1 had to go through several major architectural changes.

Re:Indeed.

[aztracker1]

Honestly, I agree with a large part of your comments... I liked asp.net 1.x simply because imho, it is/was still a better alternative to most of the other web development platforms at the time. I didn't use the VS IDE for 2002-2003 because I didn't care for it. I did like asp.net though, without the IDE, it didn't bother me to create my own web controls for most of the stuff that is now built into asp.net 2.0, and in some ways even better (master pages are a god send).

I do firmly beleive that 2.0 is much better than v1-1.1 was. I also know that upgrading 1.1 based asp.net apps is pretty painful given the changes in the environment. I still like it better than PHP, JSP, Cold Fusion, or Classic ASP for that matter... I remember playing with it as asp+ in late 2001, and thinking, "woah" this is nice. In classic ASP, I preferred JScript/JavaScript to VBScript, even with issues in regards to enumerations/collections, it was a big improvement.

Software development tends to flow in stages... Right now my bigger concern is maintaining the "AJAX" applications everywhere, that are poorly planned, or thought out... or rely on libraries that are at risk of not being maintained in favor of better libraries from other resources. In any case, I like C# a lot, and it's probably my favorite language currently. my $.02

Re:Indeed.

[XMyth]

Thanks for the reply. I can see where you're going and why I didn't notice a lot of the problems. I did a lot of WinForms work but no data-binding. The majority of my work was with ASP.NET but this was coming from a ASP and PHP background so I had nothing but praise for ASP.NET...as the poster above me said, it was leaps and bounds ahead of most other stuff out there...but apparently not all java web frameworks which I wasn't familiar with anyways.

Funny thing is, you're the first person I've ever seen NOT complain about partial class support in VS.NET wrt Windows Forms. I agree with you though, separating the auto-generated code makes the most sense.

Thanks again

Re:Indeed.

[GWBasic]

.Net 3.0 adds LINQ, which is a very powerful feature. One of my favorite variants is DLINQ, which allows you to write a database query in syntax that is native to C# and VB; AND, it will automatically populate your objects!

As a professionall C#/SQL developer, this feature is a godsend!

Re:Indeed.

[Shados]

C#3 (and equivalent versions in VB, etc), etc, will introduce LINQ, not .NET 3, unfortunately. .NET 3 is already out (Windows Workflow Foundation, ::DROOLS:: ), but LINQ is still little more than a CTP.

Seriously, the memory thing is pretty bad

[Anonymous Coward]

I just bought a new laptop with 2 gigs of RAM. I kinda want to have that for increased performance when I need it. Not just to let developers write heavier apps.

We can all live in pease

[martin_b1sh0p]

Were I work we are a half MS shop and half Unix like shop (i.e. VxWorks and Linux). I personally started out on the MS side, but I'm not on the embedded unix side. Since I've seen both sides of the coin I keep trying to tell everyone here that we can all live together in peace. But my comments always fall on deaf ears. Maybe now they'll start to believe me. p.s. is this first post??? No Way.

Re:We can all live in pease

[martin_b1sh0p]

Ugh I was so excited to perhaps get first post that I just realized my post is full of typos....Were = Where and I'm not should be I'm now. Anyway, you get the point.

LOL @ N, failures

[Anonymous Coward]

 

Nono

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Monkey business.

Good for development purposes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone have success using Linux/mono to develop ASP web apps that will be deployed to MS servers? I may need to work on a legacy ASP app and was hoping to be able to do it on my Linux pc.

Re:Good for development purposes?

[Shados]

legacy ASP can run on Linux using third party tools. However, Mono, as far as I can tell, is unrelated to it. ASP and ASP.NET are about as close to each other as Java is to Javascript.

Re:Good for development purposes?

[Jeff Molby]

ASP and ASP.NET are about as close to each other as Java is to Javascript.

Your point is valid, but your analogy is bad. Java and Javascript serve different purposes. ASP and ASP.NET both serve the same purpose, but they are separated by a very large generation. I would use C and C++ as the analogy.

Re:Good for development purposes?

[Shados]

Well, not quite. ASP is a templating/scripting language, while ASP.NET is a technology framework which has a component that just so happen to be also a templating/scripting language... They don't serve the same purpuse really.

I'll admit my analogy wasn't the best, but ASP.NET is more like ASP + VB6 + DCOM/COM+ put together, so to speak (Not quite, but you get my point).

I agree though that C and C++ is a better analogy to some extent, though.

Re:Good for development purposes?

[remitaylor]

Yes, absolutely!

At work, I have 2 old boxes under my desk running ubuntu w/ apache+mono/xsp/mod_mono. The sole purpose of these boxes is a testing/staging ground for my ASP.NET code. I'm sure someone, somewhere, has had issues porting mono ASP.NET to windows ASP.NET, running on IIS, but I haven't. Everything that I've written on mono/xsp runs great in IIS.

I'm still in the process of getting our whole web application *fully* running on mono (we have a couple libraries that reference MS Application Blocks), just because I'd like to know if I can make the app mono-compatible. We'll still run on IIS until I see evidence of mod_mono handling really heavy loads ... but it's really good to know that we could port the application to linux boxes sometime in the future.

For now, mono is best for development purposed (for me). But I also use it for all of my linux programming. A few months ago, I moved all of my personal machines from Windows to linux (ubuntu) and it's been really easy for me because I can still do all of my C# programming! I've never had any problems with mono.

What about shady Novell-Microsoft dealing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Until we know all the details of that shady Novell-Microsoft deal we are planning to avoid anything that relies on Novell, as much as possible.

Personally, I'd go further and say this is Microsoft language designed to kill the GPL and the FOSS development method, whether consciously or unconsciously. Why? Because if you can't share your software with anyone for fear of a patent infringement lawsuit, in what sense is it GPL? How are you part of a community, all building a common pool of code anyone can freely use? That is one of the main purposes of putting software under the GPL in the first place. It's also why Linux development was so much faster than proprietary software development ever can be. So who is going to stay within the lines of this so-called safety from being sued by Microsoft? Obviously nobody in the FOSS community. Microsoft gets to claim it has offered something wonderful, but in reality no one can actually benefit from its pledge without ceasing to be a member of the FOSS community.

On the other hand, I do hope Sun will release Java under GPL soon.

Sharp Develop

[dedalus2000]

so does this mean sharp develop will now run on mono?

Re:Sharp Develop

[oohshiny]

Of course, Linux has MonoDevelop, which is great for developing Linux apps and can be used for developing Windows apps.

However, I think there is some merit to the question. Sharpdevelop on Linux could be a good choice when people need to develop applications targetted at Windows, but when they prefer developing on Linux. The advantage of Sharpdevelop for that purpose would be that its primary platform is Windows, so you're less likely to incorporate Linux-specific features in your apps. (In a sense, Mono is the embrace-and-extend strategy of the Linux community.)

So, does anybody know whether Sharpdevelop runs on Mono 1.2?

Re:Sharp Develop

[miguel]

SharpDevelop currently uses Windows.Forms 2.0, which Mono currently does not support.

We will start work on Winforms 2.0 soon, SharpDevelop should work when Mono 2.0 comes out.

Re:Sharp Develop

[Anonymous Coward]

órale, güey! que viva miguel!

Re:Sharp Develop

[remitaylor]

SharpDevelop uses Windows.Forms 1.1 *or* Windows.Forms 2.0. I'm still running SharpDevelop for 1.1 to keep my desktop applications compatible with .NET 1.1 (and now, apparently, mono 1.2). Your comment only applies to those developing for the .NET 2.0 platform. Many development houses (my own included) still use 1.1 for most of their code, for compatibility and stability.

Re:Sharp Develop

[cheesybagel]

You can keep chasing the Microsoft headlights all you want Miguel, but I believe they will win at this game.

They have the initiative. You will be permanently behind the curve. One rule of warfare is you should avoid fighting in terrain picked by your opponent. Things like Samba have their place regarding interoperability, but efforts like Mono or Wine are doomed to continual obsolescence, much like OS/2 support for Windows 3.1 apps.

.NET 3

[nurb432]

its not just an 'extension', its a vehicle to kill off pre XP machines.

Re:.NET 3

[maxume]

Yeah, those jerks at Microsoft kill binary compatibility with almost every release. Sure, having the source so you can recompile is better, but Microsoft has done a pretty good job with making old stuff work on new stuff.

I guess you are complaining about new stuff not working on old stuff, but I wouldn't be working real hard on supporting people on anything less than a pIII either.

Re:.NET 3

[nurb432]

The difference in support from XP to 2000 is minimal. It was a management decision not to support 2000 ( actually, the plan wasnt to back port to XP either and force everyone to vista/2003, but that plan fell thru due to a tad bit of common sense ) in order to kill the product off. It was not a techincal decision.

2000 is a viable, stable useable product, and the fact people dont 'have' to upgrade cuts into their bottom line. This was seen as a way to get those users to upgrade.

Its not like i was complaining they arent supporting it on 98 or something.

Re:.NET 3

[maxume]

Yeah, I still have windows 2000 running on my other computer. It's a pII-333. Two things though: Microsoft doesn't consider win2k viable, they aren't selling it much. Also, supporting 2k or not is at least slightly a technical decision, depending on whether you consider expending qa resources a technical decision. It is very much a financial decision(income expense), but anybody doing business knows to expect that from other businesses.

Microsoft could have gone on supporting windows 2000 for a long time, it is pretty solid. I'm not upset that they don't though, XP is a lot nicer, assuming it is running on reasonable hardware, which most people(especially the ones Microsoft cares about) end up purchasing every 5 years or so anyway. I guess there is some merit to not wanting to spend $50 extra(or $100, etc.) for an updated OS with the new hardware, but it doesn't bother me very much.

Mostly, I'm not real convinced that the .net3 experience would be all that good on older hardware, and I'm not surprised that Microsoft doesn't care about people that want to move their older os to new hardware; the benefits of upgrading are real, more stuff 'just works' and the like.

And yes, they could spend the money on improving old stuff, but Microsoft is really, really good at making a profit, so perhaps they see marketing upgrades as a more profitable venture than giving them away for free. The linux people have it right, if you don't like it, move on.

Maybe that's why they signed the agreement with MS

[Martin Marvinski]

Could this be the reason Novell signed that agreement with Microsoft?

Query:

[Morphine007]

I haven't really been following Mono, or .NET, but upon reading this I was suddenly reminded of the story from a couple days ago about Novel and Microsoft getting into bed together.

Now, I'm sure a number of anti-microsoft fanboi-types will automatically jump all over this, but I'm hoping that someone who isn't a member of that group can explain to me if .Net (and sorta by extension, Mono) is a big enough deal to Microsoft that they would worm their way into this solely for the purposes of shitcanning Mono. Is it big enough? Is it possible? Would they even want to?

Re:Query:

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe "shitcanning" Mono was ever the plan, if FOSS developers had taken the Mono bait then MS would have exerted it's patent rights and claimed ownership of desktop linux. The FOSS community always regarded Mono with Ackbar-like astuteness, so MS and Novell changed the original plan and now we trust them even less.

Be careful who you kiss.

Re:Query:

[McNihil]

I wouldn't say that they need to. Mono (and my experiences with beagled) is a dog.. pun intended too.

What Microsoft could do is to actually make a fast runtime for Linux so it can compete against Java.

Microsoft is ~8 year behind though if they wanted that so its most probably moot.

Re:Query:

[Morphine007]

Ahh... y'know... that's even more annoying than the small conspiracy theory I put forth. I didn't know Mono was that widely shunned/avoided. It does seem odd that, as you say, a failing product geared towards the FOSS community is likely getting revamped through the support of a very-publicly-anti-FOSS organization. Thanks for the info... and who says you don't learn anything on /.? ;-)

Here's a better suggestion...

[Chabil Ha']

Dump VB.NET in exchange for C#. You'll get more supporters on an open source system if you move to language that more closely resembles C, C++, Java. Sure they're compatible on a Windows box, but C# seems like a better choice between the two on Linux.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[thechronic]

One of the major points of the .NET framework is having multiple languages being able to compile to same bytecode. The implementation of Mono or .NET has nothing to do with which high-level languages utilize it, therefore dumping VB.NET over C# doesn't buy you anything. In fact, having more languages to choose from encourages development using Mono...and if you don't like VB or C# or managed C++, you can make your own language, as long as it can be described by the semantics of the CLR.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[Shados]

The "real" .NET framework supports C/C++, but also a total of, at last count, 44 languages (give or take a few since last i checked). Removing any of them really goes against the whole idea.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[Chabil Ha']

The idea is not to remove them, but to place greater emphasis on C like languages. In my opinion, emphasizing .NET C++/C# increases the maintainability of the code because there is a lower learning curve associated with them. Going from C++ and Java to C# was a snap because most of the syntax was the same. Granted, there were a couple of things that kinda chaffed, like the capitalization of methods ( Foo.Bar(int baz); ) Aside from that and a few others, it wasn't a bad transition at all, when compared to VB.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[Shados]

Makes sense. I felt like they were putting a lot of emphasis on C#, though. The case of methods is indeed a bit confusing. Microsoft tends to make its environments with Visual Studio in mind, so most .NET developers actualy never notice, since Intellisense catches it all. When you have to edit code in VIM though because you're at the customer's site and you realise there's a bug in your code behind (which can be modified without having to recompile manually), and you fight to figure out the case, its a mess, hahaha.

That being said, VB.NET is literally... Casting is done with CType(object,type) instead of (Type)object, conditionals and loops use words instead of brackets, and you have a few syntax sugars that are totally optional, and...thats about it, really. Most .NET programmers tend to be able to switch between the two on the fly without much notice, from my experience. The two languages are really just there for handling different legacy code more than anything, as they are heavily redundant.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[maxume]

It buys you C# coders...

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[Anonymous Coward]

This discussion is all moot since Mono supports C# with its MCS compiler and has from the beginning. The VB compatibility is relatively new and only serves to highlight that it's compatible with MS-only stuff.

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[XMyth]

The VB.NET support is new (Or at least I think it is..)

Mono has always had a C# compiler

Re:Here's a better suggestion...

[maxume]

I was speaking in the context of this comment:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=206020&cid=167 99868

and this statement:

"The implementation of Mono or .NET has nothing to do with which high-level languages utilize it, therefore dumping VB.NET over C# doesn't buy you anything."

from this comment:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=206020&cid=168 00152

To me, the first comment is speaking to users of Mono/.NET/VB.Net and the second comment answers it as if it were speaking to the developers of Mono.

Good news

[A Friendly Troll]

I develop ASP.NET apps at work. I truly like the platform, and chose it myself when given green light by the boss to start on the project; I could choose any OS+platform, but I needed to get away from incompetent coworkers who (ab)use PHP (in other words, I needed peace, quiet, and well-written code - I couldn't have that unless I did it all by myself). Before I leave the company, I can tweak the apps to work with Mono, so the people in my department can take them over for maintenance on the Linux servers (there shouldn't be any more coding required, so they shouldn't have a big chance to screw things up).

Really good news. I hope we will see more cross-OS-platform apps in the future.

oh noes!

[Anonymous Coward]

its a .TRAP!

Indeed, this is NOT NEWS

[SanityInAnarchy]

People around here are acting like Mono supports WinForms for the first time.

Apparently, these people either never heard of Mono before, or assumed it was an STD. Really, nothing has changed -- it's just getting a little better and a little more complete. Basically, it's like Wine, only it might take on a life of its own outside of simply allowing Windows programs to work elsewhere.

I doubt it, though. Right now, my money's on Perl6.

Re:Indeed, this is NOT NEWS

[ClamIAm]

Apparently, these people either never heard of Mono before, or assumed it was an STD.

Well, when you think about the potential of getting fscked by an MS patent, the two seem sorta similar...

Remember kids, practice safe hex!

Whats wrong with Java?

[Billly Gates]

It uses less memory than Mono and has very mature gui compoenents in swing and awt that just work across platforms.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[adinu79]

Don't get me started on java, the most resource hungry platform I've ever seen in my life.

I personally have been using mono for the last 2 years, mainly for Web Service Creation and it was so easy to integrate with Winforms Clients that wanted to consume them. The release of Mono 1.2 means a lot of code I had running on Windows can now be executed without modifications on Linux. Well, I guess I can say that we have a completely portable Application at this moment, which makes me very happy.

BTW, I live in Europe, and if we don't let our greedy politicians get bought up by the American greedy corporations, I will be able to not give a dead rat's ass by any patent that MS wants to throw at me.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[Ash-Fox]

It uses less memory than Mono and has very mature gui compoenents in swing and awt that just work across platforms.

I still have problems with awt under Mac OS X's Java framework. So many years and still the same problems exist.

I don't care if the code is aged, I want it to work.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[Tony]

Don't get me started on java, the most resource hungry platform I've ever seen in my life.

You obviously haven't used .Net, then, nor Mono, which is worse.

Java is a tiny little resource-miser compared to .Net, and Mono is worse than .Net for resources.

But you are right. Java is no slim jim compared to even C++ or Objective-C, let alone pure C.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[oohshiny]

It uses less memory than Mono

I get a 22M RSS (280M total) for a Java application showing a single JButton in a JFrame; I get 7M RSS (22M total) for the same Gtk# application.

and has very mature gui compoenents in swing and awt that just work across platforms.

When I run a Swing application with Gtk LAF on my Linux box using Sun Java 5, it fails to pick up the Gtk theme I'm using, the menu buttons disappear when I click on them (because foreground/background seem to fail to pick up the right colors) and the menu shortcuts use the wrong font and wrong text. And that's just for starters. There is nothing "mature" about Java 5 on Linux, nor does it work in any form.

Java has its place in the world, and so does Mono, and they largely don't overlap.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[oohshiny]

Oops, I meant "nor does it 'just work' in any form". What I'm saying is: Java runs cross-platform, but the user experience is bad and a lot of things don't work quite right.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

swt

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[SnprBoB86]

FUD.

My anicdotal evidence suggests that .net's memory consumption is very reasonable and we all have anicdotal evidence that Java is a memory hog.

Let's see some benchmarks to support your claims.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[Ant P.]

A lot of cross-platform interfaces are pretty terrible. All the Mozilla-based apps I have use an apparently random mix of GTK controls, things that look like GTK but aren't on closer inspection, and other stuff that's something completely different, and the resulting mush just about manages to pass for a native GTK app. And that's an example of a GOOD cross-platform interface where they've actually tried to blend in with the OS!

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[metamatic]

The benchmarks at the shootout suggest otherwise. C# and Mono beats Java for memory usage in just about every case, usually by a factor of 2.

I program in Java and wouldn't touch Mono with a 10' pole, but Java really is a bloated pig at runtime.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[pavon]

My (somewhat limited) experience with .NET was that it's performance was somewhat uneven. Most of the time it would run about about on par with java, but every now and then I would run into something that was dog slow, as in 10-100 times slower. All those problem areas seemed to be in the libraries however, not the VM. This is understandable as java has had much more time to be polished.

Re:Whats wrong with Java?

[SnprBoB86]

Again, I'd be curious to know specifics.

Which libraries were you having problems with?

Misleading title, support is still incomplete.

[kelk1]

From mono 1.20 release notes:

ADO.NET, ASP.NET, System.Configuration, and Windows.Forms only contain partial support for 2.0 APIs, full support will only be available in Mono 2.0.

How partial is that support?

First try:

$ mono Test.exe

** (Test.exe:6411): WARNING **: Missing method System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripItem::set_ImageTrans parentColor(Color) in assembly /usr/lib/mono/gac/System.Windows.Forms/2.0.0.0__b7 7a5c561934e089/System.Windows.Forms.dll, referenced in assembly /path/to/Test.exe

Unhandled Exception: System.MissingMethodException: Method not found: 'System.Windows.Forms.ToolStripItem.set_ImageTrans parentColor'.
    at
    at kk1.Test.Test..ctor () [0x00000]
    at (wrapper remoting-invoke-with-check) kk1.Test.Test:.ctor ()
    at kk1.Test.Program.Main () [0x00000]

Second try:

$ mono /mnt/win/Program\ Files/kk1/anotherprog.exe
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

So it seems that the header should really be "Mono now PARTIALLY supports WinForms".

Appropriately enough, the confirmation word is "roughly"

Re:Misleading title, support is still incomplete.

[miguel]

The Winforms application that you tried to run is a 2.0 Winforms application, as the error reports: /usr/lib/mono/gac/System.Windows.Forms/2.0.0.0__b7 7a5c561934e089/System.Windows.Forms.dll, referenced in assembly /path/to/Test.exe

Re:Misleading title, support is still incomplete.

[ir]

That EXE file extension is a humourous anachronism on Unix. Now I know how the Mac people feel....

Re:Misleading title, support is still incomplete.

[sh4na]

So explain to me exactly where is it ever stated that Mono supports a complete 2.0 Winforms implementation? Do you actually know that there are 3 versions of Winforms/.NET? Did you at least Read The F*cking Article? Or are you one of those peeps that troll around looking for a chance to FUD? Oh, wait, this is slashdot, right....

Mono does support Winforms. It doesn't support it in your little test app because you obviously downloaded the VStudio C# express edition and have no clue which .NET version you're targetting, or what the hell you're talking about anyway. And the funniest part is that you actually took the time to quote the release notes, stating that 2.0 support is partial.... then you go on all huffy about winforms support being partial... o_O

For those interested, here is the rundown of Winforms support in Mono:

1.0/1.1: API complete, essentially in the stage of running down the odd difference in behaviour from the MS.NET implementation
2.0: API in development, expect fuller support in Mono 2.0

Implementing Winforms in Mono is perhaps much more difficult then implementing everything else, because you have to visually match the Mono Winforms behaviour with the MS.NET one, both in Windows and in Linux. The big problem with this is that Linux and Windows have completely different underlying graphical APIs, and completely different visual behaviours, so you have double the problems. The Mono Winforms implementation is all C# .NET, all the controls are implemented in .NET, and only at the lowest level is the underlying system-specific API called, to allow for uniform behaviour in both windows and linux.

So if you're that worried about Mono Winforms support, why don't you do something about it? It's an open source project, a community effort, pull the sources and hack out the missing parts.

Novell Sell Linux Out, But They're Our Friend

[mrmdls]

Let me guess, It's okay by the press for Novell to sell us out to Microsoft (and we're suppose to get warm fuzzy feelings about Mono) because the press states they still have a love fest with Novell... But, It's not OK for Sun or any other company to have survived to have signed an Agreement with the Evil Empire. Oh hell, I forgot about Apple, back awhile ago..........That ruins my thoughts.

No thank you

[Anonymous Coward]

Given Novells recent faustian pact, you may as well just buy Windows to run your .NET apps. Thanks to fucking Novell we could all end up paying an MS tax anyway.

Mono is malware, a way for MS to infect unix and the Novell/Microsoft deal just underlines the fact.

I'm a java troll.

[khundeck]

Seriously though.
Kurt

Python is much better that VB

[OshEcho]

Then learn some standard languages (Perl, Python, C++, Java...) and portable toolkits (Qt, Wx, etc), not Microsoft's proprietary stuff.
I agree.

Visual BASIC skills

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Of course its not. To get VB to do what you want you really have to work it:)

How do you uninstall Mono?

[pair-a-noyd]

I took a shot at removing Mono from a Suse 10.0 (retail) system and it informed me that removing it would break almost every package.

Mono is latched into Suse like a tick. Can it be removed at all?
Or do I need to just reinstall from scratch and deselect mono during the setup?

I really resent this entire situation.
I do NOT want M$ compatibility or inter-operability.
I LIKE the incompatibility and non inter-operability. To me, that's the best thing about Linux.

Re:How do you uninstall Mono?

[Anonymous Coward]

You apparently have no idea what Mono is. Come back and complain when you get a clue.

Re:How do you uninstall Mono?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mono is a virus used by our Microsoft asskissing "friends" Miguel & Co over at Novell to infect as much of the OSS world with a direct liability, in order to be able to scuttle as many projects as possible when Miguel recieves the order from his Redmond overlords.

A framework of our own?

[caudron]

I'm a developer. I've made considerable money as a .NET developer, specifically, and while I am fully entrenched in the Free Software camp, I admit that I like the.NET framework overall. That said ... ...The open source community has some of the best and brightest minds in the software world involved in its improvement. So the question that naturally follows is, "Why haven't we designed and implemented our own framework?"

Seriously, we spend endless hours debating which is less evil---java or mono---and we complain that both don't offer us the flexibility we have grown accustomed to in the F/OSS world, so why haven't we just started from scratch and done our own linux-centric framework to ease RAD work and simplify the task of getting started in Linux development.

I'm not suggesting it has a place everywhere. Certainly most kernel work and most driver work would need to stay C-based, but if we had a framework designed from the ground up to open Gnome and KDE devlopment (well, userspace development in general, really) it would get used. There's obviously a market for it. Developers argue over Java and .NET/Mono endlessly as to which is best for Linux development, which is faster, which is easier, which is just plain better. Write in whatever language you want, but write to the framework that best opens Linux up the developer. Without question, that would be the framework that was written specifically for it.

I dunno. There may be good reasons, but I don't see them from my vantage point.

Til I see a solid and Free alternative, I'm gonna stick with Mono (which I'm impressed with so far), but I'll keep my eye out.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/

Re:A framework of our own?

[Ash-Fox]

So the question that naturally follows is, "Why haven't we designed and implemented our own framework?"

Python is one.

Re:A framework of our own?

[metamatic]

"Why haven't we designed and implemented our own framework?"

We have. Many of them. One for Python, one for C++, one for Objective-C, one for Smalltalk...

Re:A framework of our own?

[killjoe]

Ruby on rails, django, spring, hibernate, and a thousand others.

Re:A framework of our own?

[sveinungkv]

You mean like this?

Re:A framework of our own?

[turgid]

I'm a developer....Seriously, we spend endless hours debating which is less evil---java or mono---and we complain that both don't offer us the flexibility we have grown accustomed to in the F/OSS world, so why haven't we just started from scratch and done our own linux-centric framework to ease RAD work and simplify the task of getting started in Linux development.

So, what's stopping you?

/me ducks.

Re:A framework of our own?

[caudron]

I don't disagree that Python is a good language, that makes development easy, but I'm not talking about languages. I'm talking frameworks---one totally divorced from the languages used to code against it. Python is great, but it's not even in the ballpark of .NET's scope, power and flexibility (Oh man, I am SO gonna get a /. beatdown over that comment ).

Python is to Linux as VB is to Windows. That has its place, and I'm glad it's there, but I mean a framework that would have compile to a VM that sits above the OS (perhaps even in userspace!) and that has bindings for c#, python, ruby, smalltalk, etc...).

I haven't thought through the details fully, and I could be totally wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but I don't know of anything that makes coding on Linux as easy as coding against .NET (except mono and java, which being /potentially/ non-free causes us some problems).

Consider this the feedback of a Windows developer by trade who uses Linux exclusively at home. Anecdotal, but it's the opinion of many/most Windows developers. And they often won't go with mono becuase mono is consistently about 15 months behind MS in its API.

Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/

Re:A framework of our own?

[Anonymous Coward]

Parrot is for interpreting dynamic languages. If you want to approach the relative efficiency of Java and .NET, you need a system that can deal with static types.

FUD

[oohshiny]

Microsoft has made it abundantly clear that when you implement the the ECMA stuff, and your own CLR, you are entering into a RAND agreement with Microsoft, and they have patents essential to the running of it:

It doesn't matter what Microsoft "makes clear", they are simply spreading FUD, and so are you. You don't enter into agreements by implementing a public standard. You may be infringing on their patents, but given the vast amount of prior art, it seems unlikely that Mono is infringing on any claim that would hold up. And Microsoft's statement of terms may not be satisfying, but a court would take it into account if there ever were a lawsuit.

And what's the alternative? Sun has many patents on Java, has actively defended their intellectual property against FOSS projects, and open source implementations need to implement the entire Java platform in order to be useful.

Mono, in contrast, is a separate implementation, under an open source license, based largely on its own APIs and libraries. Also, Microsoft's patents have been scrutinized in detail.

The situation may not be very satisfying, but for anybody wanting something faster than Python and higher level than C++, the choices come down to Java and C#. Technically, I think C# is superior, and at least for now, the legal situation surrounding it is also better than Java.

Re:FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter what Microsoft "makes clear", they are simply spreading FUD, and so are you. You don't enter into agreements by implementing a public standard. You may be infringing on their patents, but given the vast amount of prior art, it seems unlikely that Mono is infringing on any claim that would hold up. And Microsoft's statement of terms may not be satisfying, but a court would take it into account if there ever were a lawsuit.

So we can contact you to fund the defense of the first FOSS developer / distributor to be sued by Microsoft right? You evidently have no idea what it costs to defend against patents do you? The fact that Microsoft holds a patent doesn't mean they'll use it but it also doesn't mean they won't. Given Microsoft's hatred of FOSS, it is my guess they would if you don't do as Novell did.

Re:FUD

[killjoe]

"It doesn't matter what Microsoft "makes clear", they are simply spreading FUD, and so are you."

I don't know about that. Steve Ballmer just a few days ago all but promised to sue people who use linux unless they are using SUSE. I would take a statement from the CEO of MS more seriously then what some flunky said a few years ago.

MS has patents on .NET. They just recently promised to sue people who violate those patents. I would stay away from mono, MS could sue you just for using it.

Re:FUD

[sproketboy]

Fool. Sun will most probably GPL java.

http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingn ews.jhtml?articleId=193600331&cid=CRNBreakingNews

Re:FUD

[mythz]

Steve Ballmer just a few days ago all but promised to sue people who use linux unless they are using SUSE.

Where do you come up with this shit? Nothing else has changed except that MS has provided a covenant not to sue Novell customers. That actually makes the potential number of people/companies MS can sue smaller.

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

I clearly qualified my statement about Java with "for now" because of yahoos like you.

Furthermore, even if Sun releases Java under the GPL, that doesn't address patent concerns regarding Java.

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

I don't know about that. Steve Ballmer just a few days ago all but promised to sue people who use linux unless they are using SUSE.

Good, I hope he follows through. The sooner the better, actually. So far, he hasn't even said what patents Linux is supposed to be violating. And as soon as he does, either his bluff will get called, or the offending code will be instantly replaced, leaving Microsoft with nobody to sue.

MS has patents on .NET. They just recently promised to sue people who violate those patents. I would stay away from mono, MS could sue you just for using it.

MS has patents on lots of things and they can sue you no matter what platform you use. The same is true for Sun.

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

So we can contact you to fund the defense of the first FOSS developer / distributor to be sued by Microsoft right? You evidently have no idea what it costs to defend against patents do you? The fact that Microsoft holds a patent doesn't mean they'll use it but it also doesn't mean they won't. Given Microsoft's hatred of FOSS, it is my guess they would if you don't do as Novell did.

Microsoft holds lots of patents, and they can sue you no matter what language or platform you use. They can sue you if you use Java on Windows, or Python on Linux, or AppleScript on Macintosh, all platforms they probably "hate".

The worst that is likely to happen to a FOSS developer or distributor in such a lawsuit is that they say "my bad" they and everybody else changes their code to be non-infringing. A few big companies may be slightly more exposed, but they don't need to go on Slashdot to get legal advice.

And, like thousands of other developers, I am using Mono, I'm open about it, and Microsoft is free to sue me if they like and if they're stupid enough. The number of such lawsuits Microsoft can even launch is strictly less than 2, and the number of lawsuits they get a penny out of is likely strictly less than 1.

Re:FUD

[mikaelhg]

Furthermore, even if Sun releases Java under the GPL, that doesn't address patent concerns regarding Java.

So it's your expert opinion that the GPL doesn't specifically take into consideration just these kinds of patent concerns?

Re:FUD

[kripkenstein]

[...] for anybody wanting something faster than Python and higher level than C++, the choices come down to Java and C#.

More or less, yes, but there is a better option - combining Python and C++. I am currently working on such a project myself. By coding select time-intensive areas in C++, the app can be very fast, while the majority of the code is in convenient Python. And, importantly, both languages used are 100% free.

Re:FUD

[aztracker1]

While you're avoiding MS' patents, you should also avoid the use of Samba/SMB, FAT32, and other disk/network technologies heavily entrenched in windows... wine, and similar projects as well... I don't get why mono gets *SO* singled out here, and nobody raises an eyebrow at the former.

Re:FUD

[AuMatar]

Standard does not mean unpatented. It is very possible, and extremely common, to have a standard that is patent encumbered and that cannot be implemented without licensing them. The fact that its ECMA standardized means jack shit.

Re:FUD

[ClosedSource]

The terms of the GPL might prevent Java from being released under the GPL, but obviously the GPL has no power to override patents.

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

So it's your expert opinion that the GPL doesn't specifically take into consideration just these kinds of patent concerns?

The GPL addresses patent concerns just fine--but only for users of the GPL'ed software released by Sun and only for Sun's patents.

It doesn't address patent concerns for other implementations of Java (and there are several of them), or of people who use Sun's software under a dual license. It also doesn't address the issue of patent claims Microsoft or anybody else might have against Sun Java or other implementations of Java.

Re:FUD

[Decaff]

And what's the alternative? Sun has many patents on Java, has actively defended their intellectual property against FOSS projects, and open source implementations need to implement the entire Java platform in order to be useful.

Ok, I am curious. When have they done this?

Re:FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, I am curious. When have they done this?

A couple of examples. They have forced JBoss and Geronimo to obtain licenses for compliance testing (you can find that on CNet). And they have also asserted their rights against third party Java implementors and forced them to make both product changes that the developer had no need for and to remove people from third party Java implementation efforts after they had had access to Sun Java source code (you won't find that on CNet because those companies have no interest in ruffling Sun's feathers).

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

No, it's not a "better option". Combinations of scripting languages and C/C++ are intrinsically brittle--a single pointer error in the C/C++ code sends the whole thing crashing down. That sort of thing is OK for scientific prototyping but almost nothing else. It's worse than plain C++ because it's actually harder to debug.

There are a few real alternatives, for example, D and Eiffel. But they have almost no real-world usage, no tool support, and they are still technically far behind Java and C#.

Re:FUD

[segedunum]

You don't enter into agreements by implementing a public standard.

The ECMA doesn't stop that I'm afraid, and I fail to see where ECMA is defined as being a public standard. They're a standards body, yes, as standards bodies go, but you still have to look at what you're entering into or potentially entering into, and get that nailed down.

Re:FUD

[segedunum]

wine, and similar projects as well... I don't get why mono gets *SO* singled out here, and nobody raises an eyebrow at the former.

The reason why is because WINE and Samba are reverse engineered software. It's difficult to pin them down to anything patentable, even though they are for Windows interoperability. Microsoft have actually been quite clever with .Net, because they've got people falling into the trap of implementing .Net standards that they have patents on in order to nail it down.

Re:FUD

[ultranova]

Good, I hope he follows through. The sooner the better, actually. So far, he hasn't even said what patents Linux is supposed to be violating. And as soon as he does, either his bluff will get called, or the offending code will be instantly replaced, leaving Microsoft with nobody to sue.

Patents aren't the same as copyright. If you're infringing on a patent, you can't just replace the code with a rewrite; you have to remove the very idea from your code. Since the US Patent Office is what it is, the patent in question could well be "a method of simulating multitasking by changing the program being run multiple times per second", "authenticating an user with a secret string token" or something similar.

In other words, it is well possible to kill Linux - or any other program - off with a suitable patent.

Re:FUD

[oohshiny]

Patents aren't the same as copyright.

You're stating the obvious.

If you're infringing on a patent, you can't just replace the code with a rewrite; you have to remove the very idea from your code.

Wrong. You merely have to find something that the patent doesn't "read on"; often, that's just a small variation on the patented method.

Furthermore, we have a couple of decades of experience with this. There have been numerous patent claims against FOSS, and none of them had had any lasting effect.

Since the US Patent Office is what it is, the patent in question could well be "a method of simulating multitasking by changing the program being run multiple times per second", "authenticating an user with a secret string token" or something similar.

No, it couldn't be, because we'd know about it: patents and patent applications are published in the US. Furthermore, any bad patent like that that affects Linux or Mono in any significant way would like affect lots of other commercial software, so Microsoft wouldn't have to contend with just challenges from the FOSS community.

I don't know whether you just have a voodoo view of patents and business, or whether you are deliberately spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt, but you couldn't be doing a better job at it if you were employeed by Microsoft's PR department.

Re:FUD

[ClosedSource]

I think you're confused. Reverse engineering offers no protection against patent violations. Perhaps you are thinking of trade secrets.

Re:FUD

[Raenex]

I don't get why mono gets *SO* singled out here, and nobody raises an eyebrow at the former.

Probably because stuff like Wine, Samba, and FAT32 are used for compatibility reasons with existing Windows applications/machines. Most people developing for free platforms aren't going to do so using Win32 standards. However, Mono is different. It wants us to write free software using Microsoft's standards, and people are understandably nervous about this.

A better question is why Java has been given a much easier time than .NET. Sun has definitely gotten better about opening up, but it's taken years of prodding.

Re:FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

A couple of examples. They have forced JBoss and Geronimo to obtain licenses for compliance testing (you can find that on CNet). And they have also asserted their rights against third party Java implementors and forced them to make both product changes that the developer had no need for and to remove people from third party Java implementation efforts after they had had access to Sun Java source code (you won't find that on CNet because those companies have no interest in ruffling Sun's feathers).

In order to something to be called "Java" or "Java EE" it must conform with a set of tests. I agree with Sun on this and, as full time Java developer, I wouldn't like to see the terms Java and Java EE being misused by tens of different incompatible implementations. This is a way for protecting Java from "embrace and extend" or the usual opensource anarchy.

Today Java is the best option for crossplatform development and the developers would like it to remain so.

Bah humbug

[Panaflex]

I developed a whole game platform using embedded Mono with Irrlicht - it was somewhat larger footprint initially - but the amount of functionality and speed of code development completely demolishes the alternatives - namely C/C++ code. I never ran into ANY speed issues with the VM - so perhaps that's just interface code.

And given the state of most game engines - an extra 4 MBytes of resident code was not a problem.

RealBASIC

[metamatic]

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux. VS.Net and Mono allow me to use the same code with very little tweaking between platforms and keep using my Visual BASIC skills I learned over a decade ago.

So would RealBASIC, with the added advantages of producing actual native binaries, having a reasonable UI on OS X, and not being open to Microsoft patent claims.

Re:RealBASIC

[entrylevel]

Mmm... yes, a 2.3 megabyte "native" binary for a basic "hello world"... and all for the low, low price of $500 for the privilege of compiling cross-platform binaries. (Although apparently standard edition is free for Linux, at least for 6 months.)

And don't tell me this is FUD, I downloaded and tested the Linux version before posting.

Re:RealBASIC

[metamatic]

You're complaining about a 2.3MB native binary from RealBASIC, when the .NET framework alone is 15MB?

Re:RealBASIC

[entrylevel]

I know it's been a while since this reply was posted, but I feel compelled to respond...

Yes, I am complaining that the entire REALbasic framework is embedded in each binary, since it means that all framework code is duplicated in every compiled product. This is extremely wasteful, and locks you in to waiting on both Real Software and the developer to release a bug fix rather than installing the new library yourself when bugs are found in the framework itself.

Are you really arguing that monolithic, single-platform, statically linked executables are superior to shared libraries?

I am also arguing that cross-platform compilation in REALbasic costs $500.

Re:RealBASIC

[metamatic]

Whether monolithic statically linked executables are a good thing is at least open to debate. Many Java software vendors (e.g. IBM) ship a separate Java VM with every product, and only support the product when run on that specific VM and library version.

And $500 seems pretty cheap for a soul.

Re:RealBASIC

[entrylevel]

Your first point makes sense from the vendor's point of view, based solely on ease of support for the vendor. If there is a bug in that specific version of the vendor-supplied libraries, or that version interferes with other software on the same machine (ahem...Oracle), 9 times out of 10 you'll get the cold shoulder from the vendor. Statically linked binaries support closed-source greed and not much else.

Your second point makes absolutely no sense at all... please elaborate (or concede).

Re:RealBASIC

[metamatic]

The second point was a joke. But look at it this way:

Your objection to using open toolkits was that you didn't want to spend time learning Python, Ruby, wxWindows etc. I reckon that $500 is a fairly small sum to pay if it saves you a few days of learning, makes you not dependent on Microsoft's good will, and allows you to keep using Visual BASIC.

Re:RealBASIC

[entrylevel]

Gotcha on the joke now... I should have picked up on the tongue-in-cheek-ness.

However, please check who you are replying to. I did not, nor have I ever, objected to using open source tools. On the contrary, I use them whenever and wherever possible, and advocate the same. I do draw the line at forcing my opinion on others or trying to pound a square PHP peg into a round ASP.NET hole (and in no way do I think you were doing either of those things, but many in this thread were.)

I also fully agree that REALbasic is an excellent upgrade path for programmers from the VB6 world. However, IMHO, it's not the nicest world to live in, and I wish all VB6 programmers the best in moving to a more "enlightened" world (VB.NET/Mono being a part of the latter.)

be specific

[idlake]

People like you produce a lot of hot air, but please be specific for once:

* Which patents is Mono suppose to be violating?

* What reasons does anybody have to believe that those patents actually are worth the paper they're written on?

* Given Microsoft's royalty-free licensing terms, what argument could they possibly make to a judge about damages?

* Why do you believe that those patents are hard to work around should Microsoft be insane enough to assert them?

* Which modern platform is guaranteed to be free from potential patent claims (from Microsoft or anybody else), and where is the evidence?

If people like you can't provide clear, convincing answers to these questions, then we might as well stick with Mono for the time being.

Purging Mono

[metamatic]

There's basically no way to remove Mono from SLES without breaking YaST2... or at least, breaking it more than it is anyway, ho hum.

I dislike the situation too, but since the software I need to run on some servers only works on SLES or RHEL, I don't have many options. I certainly wouldn't run SuSE otherwise.

You can remove Mono from Ubuntu fairly easily, and I do. apt-get --purge remove mono-common will do the trick. You lose a couple of GNOME applications. I expect GNOME to become more infected in future releases following the Microsoft/Novell deal, in which case I'll probably go back to KDE.

Re:Purging Mono

[Procyon101]

Gnome is using Mono???

These are the guys who wouldn't touch C++ because vtable dispatching has too much overhead? THEY of all people are tying themselves to a VM based, garbage collected OO language? What is the world coming to?

Fine by me!

[PhrostyMcByte]

As a win32 programmer, the quicker the general populace moves to XP or above, the happier I'll be. It may not seem like it from a user perspective, but there *are* good API changes that 2k has no equivalent of.

Why not Java indeed!

[Latent Heat]

My requirements for leaving Win32 and GDI are 1) hardware-assisted scrolling, 2) fast blit of memory frame buffer where I can set the pixels, and 3) vertical sync-locked screen updates. Java Swing can do 1) with Graphics.copyArea(), 2) with BufferedImage, VolatileImage, and while Swing only offers BufferStrategy on full-screen Windows, I have written a Linux-X11-OpenGLX vertical sync checker and access it with JNI. Furthermore, the heretofore pokey horizontal scrolls and partial screen updates in X11 are now hardware accelerated using OpenGL in Linux Java 1.5. These Win32 capabilities (ScrollWindowEx(), CreateDIBSection(), IDirectDraw::WaitforVerticalRetrace()) that got removed, crippled, or marked as "unsafe code" in WinForms are available in Java and portable between Windows and Linux. Now that Sun is claiming to be open-sourcing the Java VM, and WinForms is supposed to get replaced by who-knows-what-Aero-in-Vista, and Netbeans has a GUI form designer indistinguishable from VB, I say why not Java indeed!

Re:Why not Java indeed!

[Orion Blastar]

Why not Java? After all pointers and garbage collection are for Pascal and ANSI C programmers. Java helps coddle the intellectually challenged that don't even know what pointers and garbage collection are used for anyway.

Re:Why not Java indeed!

[kingkade]

After all pointers and garbage collection are for Pascal and ANSI C programmers

Hey, here's a fun fact: did you know that pointer manipulation precludes many meaningful dynamic and static compiler optimizations?

I'm also guessing that you made a typo and know that GC is not in C.

Java helps coddle the intellectually challenged that don't even know what pointers and garbage collection are used for anyway

GC is not hard to grasp for anyone. The fact that you think it is ironically tells volumes about your intellectual prowess, in my opinion.

The more the merrier

[Brandybuck]

As a professional Qt developer, I have a great number of clients who come to me to get out of the .NET trap. They were promised by Bill Gates and Miguel Icaza that .NET was transparently crossplatform. That it was a fully open standard. That there were not any performance or memory problems. Companies too cheap to upgrade from freebiee VS Express are forking over the cash for single-platform Qt licenses. Why? Because Qt is turning out to be THE native C++ API for Windows, Mac and Unix.

Re:The more the merrier

[FlyingGuy]

Pardon my ignorance, but what the hell is QT ?

Re:The more the merrier

[6031769]

QT is an application development toolkit. It is used by (among many others) KDE and the Opera web browser.

Re:The more the merrier

[Anonymous Coward]

Until Qt is released under a non-viral open-source license (for example, LGPL), I will have to use something like wxWidgets (LGPL). Qt is out of question for me (and, yes, my software is Free and Open Source).

Re:The more the merrier

[Brandybuck]

More than that, it's the major crossplatform C++ framework.

Re:The more the merrier

[Brandybuck]

Until Qt is released under a non-viral open-source license...

Good news, it is. Under X11, Qt is released under a dual license, one half of which is the non-viral QPL. If one of your target platforms is X11, then the QPL applies to all of them. In addition, Trolltech has publically said that any valid Free or Open Source license is suitable for applications using Qt.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

you are forgetting...

[Anonymous Coward]

..how the courts and law work. MS has deep pockets, they can wear you down, even knowing they might lose, just to bankrupt some company or individual. And I don't want to hear about this theoretical barristry BS either, they (the alleged justice racket) haven't applied it to the RIAA yet, despite any number of bogus charges they have filed so far.

Re:you are forgetting...

[Anonymous Coward]

MS has deep pockets, they can wear you down, even knowing they might lose,

What does that have to do with anything? They can do that whether you're using Mono, Java, Python, or C++. You might as well stop using computers or buy Windows if that worries you.

they (the alleged justice racket) haven't applied it to the RIAA yet, despite any number of bogus charges they have filed so far.

The RIAA's evidence may be a bit weak at times, but courts continue to allow their lawsuits because the law is actually being broken. In contrast, MS can sue at most once over a patent, and either it's upheld and the code is changed, or it's struck down and nothing needs to change.

All MS ever gets out of their patents is FUD, and people like you are helping them.

RAND argreement

[Anonymous Coward]

>when you implement the the ECMA stuff, and your own CLR, you are entering into a RAND agreement with Microsoft

OMFGZ who would want to enter a RANDOM agreement with M$?!

Boycott Novel?

[walterbyrd]

Would it be a good idea?

Re:Boycott Novel?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes indeed. Those pesky story-based books of fiction are clearly to blame here. Let's burn them all.

Oh, wait - did you mean Novell?

C# vs Java

[mythz]

And may I ask, what is it that's stopped you from doing exactly what you described, but with Java instead of Mono/.NET?

If people can't see the productivity differences between c# and java languages than they either don't know c# or they are too blinded by their anti-MS hatred that they are unable to acknowledge good technology, in the future the difference will only widen with C# 3.0/LINQ. A full implementation of ASP.NET/ADO.NET/Windows Forms (which is what Mono is setting out to achieve) will allow thousands of applications to run on other platforms (Linux,OSX,etc).

Re:C# vs Java

[SanityInAnarchy]

Fine: Python. Ruby. Whatever. Not a single one of those will require "kernel hacking".

I'm looking forward to Perl6, but language wars aside, your main argument seems to be "allowing thousands of apps to run", which is what Wine does. No one's arguing against the obvious benefits for legacy software (of Wine or Mono), but if you're intentionally developing for Linux anyway, I don't see why this opens huge doors for you that weren't already there with QT or WxWindows or one of the other tens of toolkits that are already cross-platform. What is so magical about WinForms?

Oh, and I refuse to reply directly to abradsn, but for the record: There was a point besides spelling. The point is that claiming that Mono suddenly lets you code on Linux without kernel hacking is like saying AJAX finally lets you do rollovers without Flash. (Hint: We could do that before anyone called it AJAX.)

Re:C# vs Java

[Procyon101]

I have programmed both. There is no productivity difference.

Java is more of a purist language, C# is more pragmatic, but they are pretty much 2 dialects of the same language. Nothing revolutionary going on here.

Now, there are a few kick ass C# libraries that Java would do well to emulate...

Syntax candy became so important

[Vexorian]

Properties are nice, but are you seriously saying that's the only reason it is better? I prefer C# for crazy things like for each, the huge library and things like how assemblies work. Although it is not my most favorite language.

Just a personal opinion: C# Against JAVA is a coffee cup massacre, it is also better than any other language that claims to be easy to use/ fast for development

Re:Syntax candy became so important

[XMyth]

Properties were just the first thing off the top of my head....didn't mean to imply the only thing. IMHO, it's the FIRST thing but I just hate the glut of methods you see when using a java app.

Uhh

[hardgeus]

Write something in it. Seriously. When there's a high-profile app written in mono that I care about, I'll care about Mono. How about err..Gnome? Gimp? Anything? I mean Miguel was captain Gnome, why isn't the Gnome team using Mono?

Maybe I'm a mennonite, but I don't care about what the cool new API is. The only reason I even looked at QT is that it's the underlying API for KDE. Given that Mono now has Novell behind it, you'd think that they'd be able to convince SOMEBODY to use it. Maybe I'm a retard, but last time I checked Mono wasn't a dependency when I emerged anything on Gentoo...

Re:Uhh

[aztracker1]

AFAIK the latest versions of Ubuntu, SuSE and Fedora all include apps/utilities based in mono... Tomboy and Beagle come to mind foremost.. there are some other nice developments. I wouldn't be surprised to see a future version of evolution written in C# with GTK# as it's UI layer. The main push for mono on the GUI front is GTK# (GTK+ bindings for mono), the winforms support is mainly to encourage migration, or at least better cross platform ability.

QT (QT#) honestly didn't hold much traction, and the process was made more difficult because the underlying libraries are based in C++ opposed to C (like GTK), which makes platform invocation in mono much easier. wx.Net shows some promise, and looks like there may be some movement towards using the C bindings as its' core... though I think it will be a while before they are nearly complete enough.. there's also a native UI binding for OSX in Cocoa#.

There's plenty of stuff out there for use with mono, it makes an excellent platform for database and other client/server applications. It's easier to utilize system libraries (.dll/.so), at least compared to JNI. It's not the best solution for everything, but honestly, there's a lot there. I think the biggest point of momentum with .Net over Java, is the early experiences with Java.. 10 years ago, it was very slow, and anything useful was even slower. This is a perception issue. All I can say, is there are a few apps I've seen that were in Java, and later redone in .Net.. the .Net apps tended to run faster still, with lower memory footprint.

novell owns mono

[sentientbrendan]

and like you mentioned, microsoft made a deal with novell to not pursue patent violations. Obviously their projects are protected...

microsoft novell partnership

[sentientbrendan]

The information I've read on the microsoft novell deal provided scant details. Does anyone know if microsoft will be providing any support for further development of mono? After all, it is one of novells projects. Microsoft would also obviously have a lot to gain by having a decent implementation of .NET on linux servers.

Re:microsoft novell partnership

[Shados]

Im not quite sure what Microsoft would have to gain from having an implementation of .NET on Linux... Considering Microsoft sells most of the .NEt related tools at a loss compared to its R&D from the articles I saw, and give a large portion of them away, it seems fairly obvious that the only reason for .NET's existance is to sell Windows Servers and SQL Servers, which in turn sells desktop, that in turn sell office, that in turn...you get the drill.

Having an implementation of .NET would be counter productive toward that goal, IMO. Its a bit like how if Microsoft made Direct X for Linux. That would be totally retarded from a business point of view, since a large portion of Windows licenses are sold for gaming alone.

Re:And One Framework to Rule Them All (The One FW)

[Douglas Goodall]

I think I have heard something like that before, maybe in lord of the rings.

Mono? No thanks!

[12357bd]

Mono (Miguel de Icaza) was the first clear move in the MS - Linux battle, the main target being KDE, so please, don't feed the beast with more crap, thanks.

Performance ? On GNOME ?!?

[ultranova]

Some critics frequently refer to various performance issues to support arguments against broader adoption of Mono technology in open source projects, most notably within the GNOME community.

Just how slow does it have to be that even GNOME doesn't want it ? Three-legged turtle stuck on tar is like greased lightning compared to GNOME...

Classic Visual BASIC

[Orion Blastar]

You are correct, Classic Visual BASIC is version 6.0 and earlier. Visual BASIC.Net borrows a lot from C++, Java, and other languages and actually makes an attempt to be more OOP friendly than VB 6.0 was. It looks shitty because of all the new geegaws that Microsoft slapped on it at the last minute without polishing it up. Luckly Mono allows the use of Linux geegaws that don't look as shitty as the Windows geegaws.

Yeah verily

[Orion Blastar]

I am the Maddox of Slashdot and open source. Posting my satire and wit on the Internet since 1995. Posting it on BBSes since 1986. Maddox is a wannabe Orion Blastar, but I am way smarter than Maddox. You see Maddox hosts his own web site and pays for it, while I post my articles on other web sites and make them pay for it. I am truer to the pirate code than Maddox will ever be. Plus I am a Space Pirate Ninja who travelled from 4096AD back in time. You see, a true pirate don't pay for bandwith, when they can freely post on someone else's web site for free. Just use google to search for "Orion Blastar" to see my articles and Internet humor.

I am Uncyclopedian of the month for October 2006, at Uncyclopedia and it has benefits.

I contribute to open source web sites all over the Internet.

It's a bit late but I've got one flame to get out.

[bmo]

Miguel and the rest of the Ximian and Mono team should just pack their bags and get the fuck out. This whole deal with Novell and Microsoft was only possible with their help, and probable instigation. I've had misgivings about .NET on Linux ever since the idea was suggested by Miguel and the worst fears have been verified by this new Novell/Microsoft contract.

Would Miguel swear on his dead ancestors graves that Mono doesn't infringe on Microsoft patents?

"Similar deals have been done in the past, in 1997 Microsoft signed a similar deal with Apple, and Apple used that agreement and the incoming monies to turn the company around.
Sun signed a similar agreement with Microsoft in 2004, which at the time I realized enabled Sun to ship Mono on Solaris (which we already supported at that time)."

That's directly from Miguel's blog at http://tirania.org/blog/

Come again, Miguel? If mono is truely Open Source and non-infringing, what did Sun actually buy from Microsoft?

The whole irony of this was that Gnome was created because it was somehow more free than KDE at the time. Shoe's on the other foot now, eh?

--
BMO

Taking out the garbage

[Latent Heat]

I guess one thought is that garbage collection is for the intellectually lazy; another thought is that it is just part of the modern world.

The original post was on the goodness of Mono, the .NET clone, now that it supports WinForms.

The point I was trying to make was to agree with a parent post that if one is going with a GC'ed byte-coded language, why not go with the original, Java, instead of with Mono/.NET/whaterver, the imitation. If someone wants to lay into GC languages, the same complaint can be leveled at Mono.

DotGNU?

[sydbarrett74]

For all of those bitching about the cons of Mono, why not use and contribute to DotGNU?

I want action now

[Heir Of The Mess]

oh god now we are going to have a big debate how this makes Mono vulnerable to being sued, or maybe we can talk how now .NET Windows apps can run on Linux, or maybe we can talk about how Mono is chasing Microsoft.

Look, this stuff is necessary. Windows is out there on like 90% of PCs or something. If you want to get in on a market you have to make it smooth for the consumers. Sometimes you have to push ahead and worry about the consequences later. I see some real opportunities right now though. We are on the edge of the next wave of GUI APIs. Open Source people need to come up with a really cool, easy to use, yet powerful and fast...ok, pick 2....but the next generation GUI toolkit is in the making right now. Is Microsoft going to be the winner here? or is the larger open source community going to deliver. Just think, on Mono people can take their current work and use it the way they want, the next step is waiting to be discovered. Every day I set aside one hour to try to come up with something cool. I encourage all of you to do this. One of us has to come up with something. Maybe the lead will come somewhere least expected. The future of computing is will all of us, will your work be relevant tomorrow.